Time To Admit It: The Church Has Always Been Right On Birth Controlhttp://www.businessinsider.com/time-to-admit-it-the-church-has-always-been-right-on-birth-control-2012-2/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Tue, 31 Mar 2015 16:53:55 -0400Michael Brendan Dougherty and Pascal-Emmanuel Gobryhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4855426bb3f72d3000001fSylvannaFri, 24 Feb 2012 22:28:02 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4855426bb3f72d3000001f
That is incredibly insensitive! So you are saying that an innocent unborn child should be aborted if he/she is unwanted because when he/she grows up he/she MIGHT become a criminal?!? If 40% of pregnancies really are unplanned, you've now offend 40% of the people who read your comment since you've effectively said they are criminal types who should have been aborted. There's arrogance for you!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f47d46becad04602200001cMark SentesyFri, 24 Feb 2012 13:18:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f47d46becad04602200001c
Except that "living beyond their means" includes "having more children than you can support."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f47d3ee6bb3f7565700000dMark SentesyFri, 24 Feb 2012 13:16:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f47d3ee6bb3f7565700000d
In response to the idea that we really should go out and reproduce like rabbits: How about the proposition that "everything that makes life worse was either discovered or built by people. More people means more regression"?
Take a cursory look at the incredibly violent 20th century--the one in which the human population explosion actually occurred. Furthermore, the worst effects of the population explosion--the results of cutting into our natural energy and food capital (which requires a certain amount of energy and space to produce)--are yet to come.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f47bafe69bedd2176000010HannahFri, 24 Feb 2012 11:29:50 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f47bafe69bedd2176000010
Not every woman will hatve 13 kids w/o birthcontrol. First off, NFP (used properly, with temperatures taken daily + symptomatic checking of certain things...I don't want to be too specific, if you're curious 'Taking Charge of Your Fertility will fill you in) actually has a lower pregnancy rate than even teh pill and condoms. The reason so many people on NFP end up with lots of kids is that people say they'll do NFP but then in a moment of weakness really want kids, or dont' actually follow all steps. BUt, taken seriously, NFP really works, and thats what the studies show.
Secondly, I knwo many many women out there who wanted huge families, and found out they were infertile or only had a few kids even though they wanted a lot. I'm talking married-young virgins with no STDs. Plenty of people find their bodies can only conceive 2 or 3 or 4 times or so.
THirdly, the thing about affording is ridiculous. What is one reason that poor third world countries have tons of kids? Because they need them, for labor. They'll say so. Poverty means you need the helping hands. More kids do not mean you can't afford them...sure they all won't have their own rooms and their designer sneakers and trips to the Gulf, but I can tell you with bulk food and hand me down clothing and sharing rooms that the marginal cost per kid is very low (food, especially bulk food, in 25 lb bags and rice in 50lb bags at teh right stores, are cheaper than what most people's small family mealplans with restaurants and convenience items. I heard a conversation between a man with 9 kids and his coworkers some with none, and they spent the same amount on food every month)
In fact, if you look at how much food (cheap, bulk food from SAMS CLUB or BJ's or COSTCO) costs as a percentage of typical incomes, its alot lower than it was in the past when food cost was at least over half of people's pay.
And about our earth running out of space. FIrst off look at Tokyo and NYC second off, people are a lot smarter than we figure. Malthus thought we'd starve because he calculated food from land, but didn't forsee fertilizers that increased the food from the limited land many times over. There are swaths of undeveloped land on this earth. As for food, the US Gov restricts how much farmers are allowed to produce.... the greatest resource this earth has is people's brains, who invented irrigation (increasing arable land), found out you could used oil to make electricity, invented chemical fertilizers, invented so many ways to increase the calculated 'resources' which the previous generation didn't foresee. Who knows what's next?
And talking of foreseeing, like the Indus Valley civilization, like so many civilizations in history, have gone swimmingly along and then just been wiped out. Wars (nuclear?) Famine, Disease, Plague (resistant new strands of disease, etc) have cut down the human race time and time again, obliterating civilizations. Death. And the only things that can overcome death is birth. Sure we've gotten mighty proud of our accomplishments, but with these antibiotic resistant new strands of disease coming out, biological warfare and nuclear war, do we really think we've overcome death so much that we don't need birth to combat it?
And finally, truth doesn't change.
If the Catholic church is right that something is wrong, than hell, its wrong 2000 yrs later.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4637f76bb3f7b66a000021Mad MaxThu, 23 Feb 2012 07:58:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4637f76bb3f7b66a000021
News flash! The Spanish Inquisition was an office of the Spanish crown, instituted by Ferdinand and Isabella, no less, and NOT of the Catholic Church. The Pope sent a letter to the king to tell him to cease and desist with it, and the king wrote back telling him to get lost. The rest of your post is comparable in its distortion.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4636db6bb3f7fe78000013Mad MaxThu, 23 Feb 2012 07:53:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4636db6bb3f7fe78000013
So? Up until about 1935, *all* Protestants opposed birth control.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4325a069bedd457b00001aErikaTue, 21 Feb 2012 00:03:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4325a069bedd457b00001a
The problem is that the supposed 98% isn't real! The Church never changes? YEP, and we Catholics like it that way. If you choose to be vegan, you won't eat meat at a party just because everyone else is doing it. Well...Catholic here, nope I don't have 13 kids but I also have NEVER and will NEVER use artificial birth control because of the harmful effects on my body and my soul. Thankfully, I belong to a Church that backs me up on that. :) Proud to be the so called 2%!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f425dabecad04600b000001SamMon, 20 Feb 2012 09:50:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f425dabecad04600b000001
It sounds like you are not being completely honest with your fiancé. You are are doomed to failure. The way NFP works is great communication and honesty. Please sit down and talke to her. Studing Theology of the Body would also help.
Good luck!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f425abdecad04c97500003bSamMon, 20 Feb 2012 09:37:49 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f425abdecad04c97500003b
Wow, you just do not understand. I belong to the church founded by God and NOT divided by man. The Catholic was founded by Christ. I does not matter what year it is the truth is the truth. That is the the beauty of truth it never changes, if it did it would not be truth. No being Catholic does not mean you have 13 children. Have you heard of natural family planning (NFP). It requires husbands and wives to talk to eacher, to respect each other, to give themselves completely to each other. And guess what it works. As additional side benifit to using NFP: the divorce rate amounge married couples how use it is 4%. Your 98% of Catholics ignore the policy is just a made up number. Part of the invented number is based up a survey that asked if you had ever used artifical birth control. Ever is a really long time and it does not take in to the fact a lot of us have made mistakes in our past based upon misinformation, lack of understanding or many other reasons. I believe it you took a survey and asked have you ever in your life stole something (candy, cookie, toy etc..) that 100% of us would have to admit that we have. That does not mean that 100% believe that stealing is good and right.
Be open to the truth and to love. If you would really want to know what the church stands for please research theology of the body. How beautiful.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f42393c6bb3f7b472000027James H, LondonMon, 20 Feb 2012 07:14:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f42393c6bb3f7b472000027
"98% of Catholics ignore the policy."
That is pretty well dealt with by Mike flynn here:
<a href="http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2012/02/statistics-obamas-and-internet-memes.html#more" target="_blank">http://tofspot.blogspot.com/2012/02/statistics-obamas-and-internet-memes.html#more</a>
The author is a mild-mannered statistician by day, a published SF writer by night. It takes a bit of reading (as stats often does), but well worth it.
And if you're so shocked to hear that experts predict population to peak at 9Bn, why don't you go to the sources and actually read their reasons? If the planet can't support 7Bn people, where are the starving millions (war- and mismanagement-induced famines don't count)?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d6d169beddb508000023Randall E. WinnMon, 20 Feb 2012 00:14:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d6d169beddb508000023
The God of Job is cruel, reducing Job's children to mere objects to be killed to teach Job a lesson. Perhaps the author of this article should re-think his complaint that birth control has reduced women to mere objects, since that was already done in the book of Job.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d55fecad04d217000019Randall E. WinnMon, 20 Feb 2012 00:08:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d55fecad04d217000019
Catholic property is ...very properly ... protected by government-supplied police, fire and judicial bodies.
Catholic hospitals and universities take taxpayer dollars for services rendered.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d3e9eab8eabb0400000cRandall E. WinnMon, 20 Feb 2012 00:02:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d3e9eab8eabb0400000c
This is one of the most dishonest articles ever written, and a good example of why smart young kids tend to disdain Holy Mother Church.
You want one example? The argument that birth control is less necessary because population growth is slowing ignores the way that population growth is slowing: birth control (...and please don't trot out the Rhythm Method; which works all the time except when it fails, which is to say, it does not work at all.)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d330eab8ead00200000fRandall E. WinnSun, 19 Feb 2012 23:59:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f41d330eab8ead00200000f
Neither empirical science nor hospitals were invented by the Catholic Church. Nearly everything that *was* invented in Europe was invented by Christians of some sort and, before the Reformation, therefore by Catholics, but to argue that therefore Catholics invented the hospital is just silly. You might as well argue that Catholics sacked Rome, because pre-Reformation Christians did.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f414addeab8ead46e00003b30 and father of 3Sun, 19 Feb 2012 14:17:49 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f414addeab8ead46e00003b
@Thomas Zabiega Well said!! Great civilizations were always built on this one premise. COMMUNITY. America needs to wake up and start realizing that our problems come from a lack of human dignity. When you make life a decision of your own and we block, prevent and kill it when its not convienient. Guess what happens to the perception of dignity? its lost. Whether you like it or not the church is the last to draw a line in the sand. Sure there are a lot of catholics that use contraception, there are also a lot of Catholics that dont understand the reasoning behind the churchs stance. I know what my children do for me, they give me purpose. What does that purpose do for my career and work ethic, it drives me and gives me more dignity as a man. People forget that our ancestors came here with NOTHING but there dignity. They had children and did whatever it took to make it happen. Did children go with less? yes but they built character. Our ancestors came here not only for an opportunity, but more importatntly they came here for RELIGIOUS FREEDOM! So we ve allowed our government to take away our (work) Dignity by entitlements and handouts. We have bought into the illusion that we can grant life and take life when we want (roe v. wade). and now our government wants to take our religious freedoms. Wake up america!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f413a23ecad046201000032Boo RadleySun, 19 Feb 2012 13:06:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f413a23ecad046201000032
Written by two men. Of course. Stop babbling about things you know nothing about.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f412b7cecad043a6200004aNancy Bacho KennySun, 19 Feb 2012 12:03:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f412b7cecad043a6200004a
Amanda, have you seen this?
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZV7wFYeVK0&feature=player_embedded" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZV7wFYeVK0&feature=player_embedded</a>
Or this?
<a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/02/how-the-catholic-church-became-cool-overnight.html" target="_blank">http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2012/02/how-the-catholic-church-became-cool-overnight.html</a>
<a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2011/12/5-more-things-no-one-knows-are-ridiculously-catholic-but-should-2.html" target="_blank">http://www.patheos.com/blogs/badcatholic/2011/12/5-more-things-no-one-knows-are-ridiculously-catholic-but-should-2.html</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4129a0ecad04256400001eNancy Bacho KennySun, 19 Feb 2012 11:56:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f4129a0ecad04256400001e
I firmly believe that with this discussion, God is giving a lot of people another chance at living in a way that transcends the rest of the population. I agree with onemoresoul.com who says the root cause of our society's problems from promiscuity to divorce to abortion is the lack of knowledge of NFP. People don't realize how effective NFP is ~ and that
a) it is just as effective as the Pill if practiced according to the instructions, which include watching many things going on with the woman's body
b) it is the most natural thing we can do with our bodies (yoo-whoo, all you Whole Foods customers who buy organic but come home and ingest The Pill!)
c) the divorce rate of those who practice NFP or the Creighton Model of NFP have a less than 5% chance of getting divorced! (Marriage problems, anybody? Try NFP!)
I can say from personal experience that when couples practice NFP, sex is a really big deal. We trust God more than ever, plus we are VERY attracted to each other during the time of abstaining (just like when we first met). We fall in love over and over again when we abstain. It renews the first feelings we ever had for one another, (because we were abstaining when we first met).
That powerful experience transcends any attraction to the secretary with the miniskirt or the handsome UPS man. That kind of temptation that destroys so many marriages these days is such a cheap substitute to "the real thing" that God designed. But over 90% of Catholics accept that cheap substitute and are driving their marriage on "flat tires" using their artificial contraceptives.
I think if that secret were known, our Church could cause a real sexual revolution back to God's original plan for a restoration of our society.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f40791fecad04d82800004dJoe MannSat, 18 Feb 2012 23:22:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f40791fecad04d82800004d
You talk like another puffed-up, silly minded protestant who read the Bible and thinks he has it all figured out. You've made a laughing stock out of Christianity. Of course, you're not really Christian, but you use the name. You better start praying the Rosary you belittle, or you'll surely be lost.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f407857eab8ea585a000066Joe MannSat, 18 Feb 2012 23:19:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f407857eab8ea585a000066
Well, another long-winded, confused and worldly lost fool. At least you don't suffer for company.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f407766ecad04c334000009Joe MannSat, 18 Feb 2012 23:15:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f407766ecad04c334000009
The Catholic Church officially began when Christ said to Peter, "Peter, you are the Rock upon which I will build my Church," in the year 33 A.D. Anyone who says anything different is wrong, and probably a malicious idiot.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f40768969bedd837000000bJoe MannSat, 18 Feb 2012 23:11:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f40768969bedd837000000b
Shut up already. No one wants to know whether or not you practice birth control. It's a private issue. Your private issues are usually disgusting, and this issue is no exception. Catholic organizations do not have to provide birth control any more than Jewish deli's have to serve pork sandwiches. It's a matter of personal freedom. If you're truly Catholic, then you know the truth and what you must do. Otherwise, you'll wind up spending an eternity in hell with the rest of these sons of...whatevers.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ffb656bb3f7d40200005eNiels Georg Bach ChristensenSat, 18 Feb 2012 14:26:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ffb656bb3f7d40200005e
If you visit a latin american country and look at the birthrate of catholic professionals, you will find that the birthrate is much lower than most poor families.
Now how come, at the one hand you agitate against contraception, and then by the lucky hand of God you manage to get only a couple of kids.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3eb5f169bedd1b32000033sharon Fri, 17 Feb 2012 15:17:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3eb5f169bedd1b32000033
I would like to know where this 98% comes from...because that does not sound accurate AT all. I haven't seen any statistics that actually backs this up and seems just a number that was picked out of the air recently to ensure that people side with this bill (seeing as how not even the Catholics seem to be practising this rediculous rule.)
Also not sure how one can deny the facts that since birth control, contraceptions and abortions have become socialy acceptable the rate of divorces has sky rocketed, the ages of kids starting to have sex seems to be getting younger and younger, teen and unwanted pregnancies keeps growing (just look at Planned Parenthood's Abortion percentages, which they are quick to deny it's their main source of revenu which is a LOAD of bull) . What people don't seem to understand or find hard to believe is that the church's strong stance on this subject isn't to Villify anyone, revoke human rights, or demonize sex it is simply and beautifully to keep the dignity of the human person, retrain the value and beauty of the act itself, and to keep people from getting hurt or being hurt. Being objectified hurts, aborting a child hurts (not just the baby but all people involved whether they think so at the time or not), having sex with someone who says they love you but not enough to share their whole self with you so they use a barrier, hurts.
As soon as people look at the church teachings rationally, and try to understand the why's instead of being so quick to throw pitchforks and claim the church needs to get with the times, then it will become much clearer as to why this bill that is infringing on one of the rights and freedoms of Christians as a whole, is absurd.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3d8dfceab8ea006c000005Alex TanThu, 16 Feb 2012 18:15:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3d8dfceab8ea006c000005
Add a comment...Well written, and I agree, it's about morals. People used to say 'dont be like an animal (in controlling urges)' but animals have sex to obey an instinct, to pro create. They don't have sex anytime they want, but only when the female is in heat! Humans, (not all of course), are taught by media and all those forces of advertisement in the name of commerce, as well as people with off compass morals, to do it 'anytime you like it'. The Catholic Church is a rock, and it will always stand for what is right and pronounce it even at the expense of persecution. We usually say time will tell, but this article has waited 40 years to be written and that's good enough time as any to make a conclusion. People will always disagree of course, because in the end, we are ruled by our rock, our compass, our guide. For Catholics, it's the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ, passed on to this Church and shepherds, for others, it's another book, or what they think is their conscience or what somebody has written. There's bound to be disagreement always. For sure, the Church sticking to the interpretation of the teachings of Christ harms no one, and sometimes it's hard to see the benefit in the short term, but now we see some of it after 40 years. What about the other teachings? To be loose morally, to disobey Church teachings, to not value marriage? Where does that lead us? I recently read the book of Steve Jobs and there is a passage there where it is explained that he was an unwanted child, and almost was aborted, save that his mother was Catholic and wouldn''t consider abortion. How many Steve Jobs didn't become a Steve Jobs because the fetus was aborted? Point is, the Church guides us and helps us tune our compass, we have the choice to follow or not to follow, but the Church has to do it's job, else Jesus would have been wrong when He said to Peter: 'the gates of Hell will not prevail against it'. God be praised!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3d5e966bb3f72e79000037Bob the Catholic RealistThu, 16 Feb 2012 14:52:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3d5e966bb3f72e79000037
Sorry son, unless NFP stands for "no f... period", better hope a crib is one of your wedding gifts. But good for you if you can make it work. My Catholic wife has been on the pill since she was a teenager, primarily for unusually heavy menstrual bleeding. And now having had an ablation for the same problem (the only other alternative is a hysterectomy or perhaps bleeding to death), if she were to get pregnant, both she and the baby would die.
This isn't an issue, its just being ginned up as one by Republicans with nothing else to argue over. They didn't care a bit when 28 states put similar laws in place, but the really care now? and the biggest proponent is a MORMON?? Not even close to sincere.
Finally, if you allow all employers to pick and chose healthcare for religious reasons, what if your company is suddenly run by a Jehova's Witness? And you need a blood transfusion or you will die? Guess you pay for it out of pocket. Then there are other denominations who disavow all inoculations. Guess your kids get sick then.
This rule RESPECTS ALL religions, and does not pander to the few. You all want some sort of American Taliban, which would not only be un-American, but somewhere I don't want to live. Not the country I served for many years in uniform. Period.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ca9a6eab8ea1e28000035tdThu, 16 Feb 2012 02:00:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ca9a6eab8ea1e28000035
It is because of birth control that people believe they can have sex without consequences, but they're wrong. There is always consequences because birth control is not 100% protection. Just think, before the pill existed, were there many children out of wedlock? Hell no! People wouldn't dare to be promiscuous outside marriage.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c9cbeecad047d72000021DKThu, 16 Feb 2012 01:05:50 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c9cbeecad047d72000021
The Supreme Court upheld the chuch's rights to discriminate against employees who serve as "ministers of the faith." That does not include everyone employed by the church.
An employer must uphold laws enacted by the state and federal govt even if those go against their religious beliefs. No one is forcing the church to take tax payer funds. If it violates their beliefs, they should get out of business ventures that require them to follow state and federal laws. See: Washington DC ending their contract with the city because they were no longer allowed to discriminate on sexual orientation. Easy!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c9a9decad04866a00002bDKThu, 16 Feb 2012 00:56:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c9a9decad04866a00002b
Yes, that "private" part regards the rights of the person carrying the fetus. You compare abortion to genocide, but ending that requires you to force women to carry a pregnancy against their will. You say the father should have influence into the fetus's life, but that would require him having a say over someone else's autonomy.
It's easy to make comparisons to Nazi Germany when you ignore the existence of women.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c61786bb3f7d14600000aElizabethWed, 15 Feb 2012 20:52:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c61786bb3f7d14600000a
Add a comment..."There are none so blind as they who will not see", Henry. "The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances...." I think you've missed the whole point of the article.
The Church does not say that people have to have 13 kids, it simply states what is the moral use of sexual intercourse. The fact that people don't like it is not relevant to it being true or false. The Church is not there to change morality. Morality is.
If the Church were to say tomorrow that it's ok to kill your neighbour that wouldn't make it right.
We live in a society that is very confused on issues of sexuality, and the results can be seen as this article points out.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c413decad048759000031Richard PrudloWed, 15 Feb 2012 18:35:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c413decad048759000031
God does not change, and the Chuch of Christ; the Catholic Church does not change what was handed down from the Apostles. Being more flexible is what the Church tried at the disaster called Vatican II. It is now up to the Church to use the backbone it once had, and it appears that's what may be happening.
PS: Regarding 13 kids.
What harm is there in having thirteen or sixteen or maybe 3? Men have will and grace to support their cupidity. The endless recreation nonsense sounds like Henry may lack some will or grace.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c3e61eab8ea636f000001RedoWed, 15 Feb 2012 18:23:13 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3c3e61eab8ea636f000001
Mr. Blodget,
1) Assume for a minute that having more than two children wouldn't be too expensive. Would more Americans have more children?
No. The truth is, real inflation adjusted inflation family income has not changed since introduction of the pill. What has changed is the American view of children. Children are considered a burden, inhibitors of parental freedoms, and materialistic hindrances.
As a pastor in a hospital I get to see many dying patients. With narrow an exception, many dying patients with few children often bemoan the fact that they didn't have additional children. Now dying, they express regret for having had chased money/job/etc over having additional children. So many of them would trade their wealth for an additional face or two sitting beside them in their final hours.
2). In regards to your resource/sustainability argument, consider that larger families actually use less resources. Because economic pressures do not allow a large family to take two annual family vacations, have a car for each member of the family, have a room for each member of the family, etc, overall resource usage is reduced. As parents of larger families tend to stay married (my observation), their resource usage will not suffer the two household resource usage increase fate of a divorced/un-cohabiting family. While this larger family would quantitatively consume more food and clothing, the per person food and clothing resource usage would be reduced by economic pressures. Restaurant food or designer clothing and their excess resource utilization are not the staple of a lager family.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3be3f169beddf33d000016Thomas ZabiegaWed, 15 Feb 2012 11:57:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3be3f169beddf33d000016
If you use the Clear Blue Monitor, NFP will work for almost any type of cycle. Contact the Marquette University Institute of Natural Family Planning to find out more (they have a good internet site). And, pregnancy is not a disease. Having more children can be quite therapeutic, but only if it is within a marriage.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3bcdba69bedd1108000045Frank BlisardWed, 15 Feb 2012 10:22:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3bcdba69bedd1108000045
The reason nobody wants to have 13 kids these days is because nobody has had 13 kids recently (except those who have, who are regarded as oddballs). Multiply those 13 non-kids by the number of childless baby boomers and you've got the number of non-taxpayers who would have supported them in their old age, but now can't, cuz they were never born. So now they must reply on the government to support them in their old age and, guess what, oops, sorry, we don't have the money, so we'll just have to put you all to sleep -- quietly, of course.
If 98% of Catholics agreed that smoking was good for us, would that make it so?
Here's something that hasn't changed in 2,000 years: human nature!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3bc51569bedd986e000061Vir CatholicusWed, 15 Feb 2012 09:45:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3bc51569bedd986e000061
But emergency contraception does interfere with the implantation of a fertilized egg which we know for a scientific fact is human life. Within 15 minutes the sperm can reach an egg and the exchange of genetic material make completely unique and never before seen human DNA. Human DNA will only result in development into a human fetus, which will grow into a human baby, which will grow into nothing other that a human being IF he/she is not murdered by their mother with "emergency contraception"http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ba122ecad04ee4000003fJason JenkinsWed, 15 Feb 2012 07:12:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ba122ecad04ee4000003f
General lowering of moral standards: Really, there's been a lowering of moral standards because MONOGAMOUS MARRIED COUPLES are using birth control?
A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy: Statistics, please? It seems unlikely that the use of birth control has increase illegitimacy. Perhaps you are think of a lowering of standards in conjunction with FAILURE to use birth control.
The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men: You think this is NEW?
Government coercion in reproductive matters: Creating a law that abridges the freedom to control one's life, like a ban on birth control, is government coercion. Government coercion is fine with you, as long as it isn't the Church that's feeling coerced. You'd prefer the Church to do the coercing. By the way, does the Church feel it's coerced because it has no control over its employees' use of their WAGES to do things the Church doesn't like? Birth control, supporting same-sex partners, divorce lawyers?
Read more: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/time-to-admit-it-the-church-has-always-been-right-on-birth-control-2012-2#ixzz1mRye1xIk" target="_blank">http://www.businessinsider.com/time-to-admit-it-the-church-has-always-been-right-on-birth-control-2012-2#ixzz1mRye1xIk</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3aeeb86bb3f72c42000001Joey GriffisTue, 14 Feb 2012 18:31:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3aeeb86bb3f72c42000001
Except there are perfectly natural and healthy ways to not have 13 kids and not use contraceptives.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ad8a7eab8ea894a000012iconoclastTue, 14 Feb 2012 16:56:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3ad8a7eab8ea894a000012
You mean the Southern Baptists?
Hated... check
accused of ignorance... check
accused of being behind the times... check
not sure whether folks think they have devils though.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a9a27eab8ea1b4d000028Edgar OrtizTue, 14 Feb 2012 12:30:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a9a27eab8ea1b4d000028
Henry, I fear you have missed the point of how the Church views this issue. The Church has this position because the use of contraception has ramifications that are spiritual as well as physical. It is viewed as a sin. This concept is not understood by many in this day and age, but in short, The Church teaches that there are eternal consequences to our actions as well as temporal consequences.
It is not a matter of being "practical" as you assert. To be more general, sin is an impediment to our spiritual development and a obstacle to our relationship to God. Part of the Church's responsibilities is to minister to the spiritual needs of the flock as well as its physical needs.
Even if you don't believe in the Church's doctrines, I think you would agree that it is only logical that if the Church believed that what someone was doing could have a negative impact on their eternal soul that they (The Church) would be advising that person not to engage in that activity. It would be irresponsible and sinful (Sin of omission) if the Church to not tell that person to not pursue that activity.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a97596bb3f7621a00005cRoo ForlifeTue, 14 Feb 2012 12:18:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a97596bb3f7621a00005c
Big Sis If you are still having hormonal problems you may want to contact a fertilitycare physician that practices Naprotechnology. You can learn more by listening to Dr Hilgers on spirit radio link and his book~
Spirit Catholic Radio "Your Fertility Care Consult" with Dr. Thomas Hilgers, founder of the Pope Paul VI Institutefor The Study of Human Reproduction ~
23 Shows covering Naprotechnology, Disturbing Trends in the Health Care for Women, Children and Families, Contraception, abortion, women healed of Infertility, Recurrent Spontaneous Abortion (miscarriages), Endometriosis, Polycystic Ovarian Disease (PCOD), Premenstrual Syndrome, Postpartum Depression, Prematurity & one show Calling Young Doctors & Physicians
<a href="http://www.spiritcatholicradio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=93%3Adr-hilgers&catid=6%3Aaudio-downloads" target="_blank">http://www.spiritcatholicradio.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=93%3Adr-hilgers&catid=6%3Aaudio-downloads</a>
The NaProTechnlogy Revolution: Unleashing the Power in a Woman's Cycle" is a book about finding real solutions to real problems--problems such as infertility, menstrual cramps, PMS, ovarian cysts, irregular/abnormal bleeding, polycystic ovarian disease, repetitive miscarriage, postpartum depression, prematurity prevention, hormonal abnormalities, chronic discharges, and family planning.
The new women's health science of NaProTechnology is based on the Creighton Model FertilityCare™ System, which is a natural fertility tracking that generates standardized information about women's reproductive health and enables couples to achieve or avoid pregnancy effectively. It is the only system that can be used with NaProTechnology to help diagnose and treat reproductive health problems. (You can read the Introduction of the book by pressing on Introduction on left side & there is also a link to Medical Risks of Infertility) <a href="http://www.unleashingthepower.info/#" target="_blank">http://www.unleashingthepower.info/#</a>
NaProTECHNOLOGY-trained physicians can be found at "Find a Medical Consultant Section” <a href="http://www.fertilitycare.org/" target="_blank">http://www.fertilitycare.org/</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a5ea9ecad041207000054Jo NoybTue, 14 Feb 2012 08:16:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a5ea9ecad041207000054
I think one thing people are missing out on is that some forms of birth control, like the pill, are used to treat medical issues as well. I have been on the pill for 5 years and am not all that happy about it, but I know that I need it. I have also done a lot of research about the pill since I am taking it and have found some interesting facts:
- pill increases risk of breast cancer, reduces risk of ovarian and cervical cancer
- being on the pill actually causes a woman to be percieved as less atractive to men
- a woman's phermonal preferences can change from on the pill vs off the pill. So for example, woman on pill, attracted to a certain man, goes off pill, no longer attracted to that man
And there are many more interesting points that I can't remember right now.
But my point is, the Catholic church should realize that there are other reasons for medication like this, not just for birth control.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a47f7eab8ead31c000044Ann Tue, 14 Feb 2012 06:39:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3a47f7eab8ead31c000044
Add a comment...Actually, the great thing about NFP is that you absolutely CAN use it effectively with abnormal cycles because it is specifically tailored to each woman's individual cycle, regardless of how "normal" or "abnormal" that cycle is. People mistakenly confuse modern methods of NFP with the Rhythm Method (which has not been taught for decades) which did require regular cycles for successful use.
As an NFP instructor for ten years and a successful practitioner of NFP for all my fertile years, I can tell you that it does indeed work. In this day and age when so many people are so concerned with natural health and "green" issues, I am continually amazed that so many women are willing to consume or implant artificial devices on a long-term basis to control their fertility, which, after all, is a completely normal function of the body. Why do we spend so much time and effort trying to alter or eradicate what is completely normal? Is it not much better to try to understand and work with nature? Addtionally, NFP is the only method of family planning that requires the mutual cooperation of the couple to make it work; all other methods place the burden of responsibility soley on one partner. Makes sense, since sex is, after all, between TWO people.
For more information about the Sympto-Thermal Method of NFP, go to www.ccli.org.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39f1476bb3f7e405000005RichardTue, 14 Feb 2012 00:29:43 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39f1476bb3f7e405000005
Add a comment...
What's wrong with a couple waiting to get married until they are financially able to cope with the responsibilies that may come with it??http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39bf5a69bedda81a000029mangled_mingusMon, 13 Feb 2012 20:56:42 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39bf5a69bedda81a000029
Thanks to contraception, my parents had exactly the number of kids they wanted and were able to provide us with a great life. My mother was able to be more than a walking womb.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39add4eab8eaf67f00004cmikeconventeMon, 13 Feb 2012 19:41:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39add4eab8eaf67f00004c
"The inventor of the cure for cancer might be someone's fourth child that they decided not to have."
Yeah, and if Hitler's mom had access to contraception, maybe we wouldn't have had World War II...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39a1826bb3f7d170000027PhloontMon, 13 Feb 2012 18:49:22 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39a1826bb3f7d170000027
Did I read you right? Are you actually saying that the Catholic Church was the driving force behind the African slave trade?
That's quite a claim.
By the time the Americas were settled, the Catholic Church had already been teaching decisively against slavery for centuries. In Biblical times the Christians had an ambivalent approach to slavery, because they viewed it as an inescapable fact of life. They condemned cruelty and harsh treatment of slaves without explicitly condemning the practice of involuntary labor.
The Portuguese and Spanish slavers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in Latin America were acting against Church teaching, just like Catholic politicians who support abortion today are acting against Church teaching.
Catholics had almost nothing to do with the cross-Atlantic slave trade to the American south in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. That was nearly all business conducted by tribal Africans, Muslims, and Protestants. The Catholic Church condemned slavery long before the Protestants did.
To say that Catholics were responsible for the slave trade is ridiculous. And even if this were true, how would it detract from Church teaching on contraception?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f395c4cecad048e4c000045DebraMon, 13 Feb 2012 13:54:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f395c4cecad048e4c000045
If we were not committed to the concept that we can divorce sex from its obvious biological consequences by using birth control (which fails often enough that we abort 1 million babies per year in this country alone), people would probably go back to thinking a little harder about who they get in bed with. Seeing as how most women in our country do in fact contracept, why is it you think that the rate of illegitimate births and unwanted pregnancies keeps getting bigger? Sex is a choice, people. We are not animals. We are not slaves to our instincts and hormones. People always had premarital and extramarital sex, of course. There were always some who just couldn't resist. But now, nobody is even trying to resist the temptation, even when they've already made a commitment to someone else, because they think the negative consequences have been removed. But guess what? Contraception isn't fool proof. It can and does fail with some regularity.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f395537ecad049244000039David P. MaidaMon, 13 Feb 2012 13:23:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f395537ecad049244000039
When did having a big family be a bad thing or a thing of the past. Mother Teresa said saying their are too many children are like saying there are too many flowers. "Wrong is wrong even when everyone is doing it, and right is right even when little do it".http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f393c64eab8eaf736000017Misty Dawn WatrousMon, 13 Feb 2012 11:37:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f393c64eab8eaf736000017
Since when does not using contraception mean you have to have 13 kids? I've used natural family planning (sympto-thermal method) for nearly 12 years and we have 4 children--that we WANTED. I have friends who have hard pregnancies that have two. NFP was shown in a major German study two years ago to be as effective as the Pill, with the benefit that it does not suppress or destroy the sacred gift of fertility, while still fostering the "one-flesh union" that brings grace into a marriage. And as for the Church changing, you still don't get it. The Church's core morals don't change because they're from God, who knows that human nature is the same today as it was 2,000 years ago. Modern "change" regarding sexuality and marriage have brought great suffering into the world, both on a physical and spiritual level. As Chesterton said, "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.:
You say the Catholic Church needs to "get with the times." The fact that it is the ONLY institution that has never compromised its morals despite all the social changes of the past 2,000 years ought to tell you it's teachings are not just democratically-derived. I take great comfort in the fact that the teachings of Catholicism are the same today as they were in the first century and will remain as such for the next many thousands of years...I just wish I could be around to see people lamenting that the Church needs to "get with the times" a thousand years from now. ;)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f393620eab8eaef2900000eSandyMon, 13 Feb 2012 11:11:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f393620eab8eaef2900000e
Add a comment...
You are not getting it.. As Catholics we believe (or are suppose to believe) that the Church teaches the truth as revealed by God. The Doctrine of the Church is not the opinion of man. We believe that God, our Father loves us and we trust in Him even when we don't completely understand. God's will does prevail in the end.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f392b9decad048501000001Dave CapanoMon, 13 Feb 2012 10:26:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f392b9decad048501000001
"The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company. And the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years."
The Church simply doesn't change because times change. The Church teaches that God is the author of life. As such, we participate with Him in its creation. To interrupt that process either through contraceptive pills or through use of a condom is to interfere with God's plan for us. That's what the Church teaches. That was true 2000 years ago and it's just as true today. The Church simply can't change what it holds to be true for the sake of bring "modern". If anything, as the author writes, the Church has been at the forefront of these changes.
Although the physical world has changed in 2000 years, people's natures have not changed. And that's what we're really dealing with, people's nature.
There are also other ways of planning a family that don't involve having "13 kids" as you say. Again, the Church is at the forefront of this with its Natural Family Planning method which is as effective as any contraceptive method with NO side effects. Contraceptive pills come with numerous warnings of side effects.
The argument for the Church becoming more modern is a shallow and false straw man.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39192deab8ea9b65000014haloMon, 13 Feb 2012 09:07:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f39192deab8ea9b65000014
yea the world changes but God and his holy church's teachings do not !!!!!!!!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3890fc6bb3f7581d00002bRobin S.Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:26:36 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3890fc6bb3f7581d00002b
With that sort of causation analysis, I wonder if you're a politician. Has it occurred to you that abortion was legal and prevalent BEFORE Roe v. Wade? All Roe v. Wade did was say that states couldn't ban abortion. Has it occurred to you that a million things affect crime rates? Let's get our facts straight before we make rampant conclusions about the after affects of court decisions.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f38865c6bb3f71a09000019TedSun, 12 Feb 2012 22:41:16 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f38865c6bb3f71a09000019
Three problems with your argument. First problem: Nothing in your argument addresses the realities raised by Michael and prophesied by Pope Paul VI, that artificial birth control has lead to many societal evils created by treating sex as a feel-good sport. We will continue to live with these evils so long as we treat sex the way we do. Note that population issues can be solved by technology without messing with human sexuality. Second problem: modern natural family planning techniques are as effective as artificial birth control without its side effects - it's a scientific fact. Thus, no one needs to have 13 kids if they don't want them, and the pill is not required and both sex and the woman are respected. Third problem: Your assumption on Church flexibility belies a misunderstanding of what the Church is. The Church is not just a man-made organization, but it is a divine institution that God keeps free from error on all matters that it definitively defines as being true. As the proclaimer of Truth, the Church *cannot* be flexible on matters of Truth - *especially* when the Truth is unpopular. The Church has decided the issue of artificial birth control definitively, so it's teaching is never going to change - no matter how many Catholics decide to sin by discarding this important teaching. While the Church can be flexible in many things, and in fact goes to great lengths to be as flexible as possible, the Truth cannot change; not now, not 2000 years ago, and not 2000 years from now. So, no matter how much the world changes, definitive teachings of the Church won't change (non-definitive teachings can and do change). Funny thing: the Church is still here - unchanged on any definitive teaching in 2000 years - but all other human organizations have come and gone, or have fundamentally changed. So, again, maybe it *is* right after all.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f384b74eab8ea6a5700006fE Flotsam PynheddSun, 12 Feb 2012 18:29:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f384b74eab8ea6a5700006f
"The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company. And the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years."
Go read the Bible and good history book, Blodget. The world -- people haven' t changed at all. People are still rebellious, wicked and self-interested. And BTW, the Church is the only institution founded by the Lord Jesus Christ. It ain't like no other organization or company. The Church ain't General Electric.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3837e16bb3f7df7a000038Ann FreseSun, 12 Feb 2012 17:06:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3837e16bb3f7df7a000038
Birth control gives women control over their fertility and is therefore the biggest step towards equality in the modern era. Has it upset the social norms? Yes, so did freeing the slaves. Thomas Aquinas, a great Catholic thinker, argued that slavery was ok in certain situations. Just because his thoughts have guided many in moral decisions doesn't mean we should abide by all of his philosophies. And holding Kim Kardashian up as a moral lodestar is the equivalent of holding up a porn star as representative of male desire.
Yes, cultural change is bumpy. But equality is moral and just. As we make progress towards a more equal society, it means re-evaluating and updating the assumptions that underlie our moral code.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f37e64ceab8ea2422000037Derrick GibsonSun, 12 Feb 2012 11:18:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f37e64ceab8ea2422000037
One might wonder just how the Catholic Church came to be an organization which spans the globe so completely. Before we praise them for their success, might we spend just a moment questioning the role of the Catholic Church in funding their expansion on the backs of Africans, trafficked into the trans-Atlantic Slave Trade.
Be a very cold day in hell, before I take lessons in morality from anyone associated with a crime so monstrous that it spanned centuries. Still awaiting that first word of condemnation levied at the cadre of padres who sanctioned that crime, over and over again. That they can summon the resolve to criticize the first, African-American President of the United States of America is neither news nor surprising. Did we not all witness their gnashing of teeth at the notion that he might speak at the University of Notre Dame?
Strange how the subject of abortion is always beyond the pale to the men who lead the Catholic Church; whatever one make think of the intentional end of a pregnancy, in what world does that act surmount the evil of the intentional death of millions of men and worsen, caught up in the maw of a commerce that was started by the Church? Not too mention the lives of suffering that were lived so that the Catholic Church might profit. Why condemn a President who has never participated in a single abortion, whilst never uttering one word of condemnation for the dozens of Popes who directly profited from the deaths and the pain of African men, women and yes, children?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f37e3dfeab8eaff23000013Fr. Christopher PlantSun, 12 Feb 2012 11:07:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f37e3dfeab8eaff23000013
I would like to make some observations on how this discussion is going.
Typically, the pattern on discussions of this nature looks like this.
Position A makes a universal truth claim.
Position B makes a universal truth claim that position A's truth claim is mere opinion and should not impose that opinion on everyone else. This in itself is a universal truth claim that position B is imposing on everyone else.
Everyone gets angry because now there are people that are basically saying that they should not make universal truth claims that impose on everyone else, which is in itself, a universal truth claim being imposed on everyone else.
Is it not possible for us a human community to recognize that all of us believe certain truths strongly, even religiously, to the point where we say that others must recognize them as true? Then, recognizing that, is it not possible for us to have a rational discussion about them, without ad hominem attacks or doubting the good faith of those involved in the conversation?
I admit, it is easier said than done.
I'll list some of the universal truth claims that have been imposed (or proposed) so far:
1. Anyone, regardless of his or her opinion on the use of contraception, etc. can oppose this mandate simply because it is so unconstitutional.
2. the HHS mandate is 100% unconstitutional and, if not challenged, will only lead to more death and destruction--and perhaps some laws people who don't have a problem with contraception might object more to (such as a mandate that would require employers to pay for euthanasia "rights"--you are forewarned)
3. Blessed art those who covereth for pedophiles.
4. Other religions existed long before Christianity came along, and others will exist long after Christianity has been abandoned and forgotten. You are newcomers on the stage of life, doomed to eventual obscurity like everything else; nothing really special at all.
5. if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh.
6. This "discussion" is worthless and offensive. A bunch of prudes opining about how horrible it is that women have birth
7. since the fall of Rome, nearly all economic advancement in the world has been driven by societies that are NOT primarily Catholic. The Renaissance in Italy, which is credited with waking up Europe from the Dark Ages, is mostly credited as a relearning of pre-Catholic Roman and Greek ideas. The Protestant reformation led to the rise of northern Europe-- industrialization started in Britain, and today Germany and Scandinavian countries lead Europe economically. What do the PIIGS have in common? All Catholic, except Greece. British North America is globally dominant. Catholic Latin America still struggles. Advanced Asian countries are non-Catholic. Most ascendant developing nations are non-Catholic.
There are many valid points that can be found in these statements and more. We reach progress when we continue to discuss them. Not much progress is made when one side unfairly accuses the other side of imposing personal belief, when, in fact, that's what everybody does when they have a conversation about things that really matter.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f374810ecad04d71f00004flamb4866Sun, 12 Feb 2012 00:03:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f374810ecad04d71f00004f
Check out the Creighton model.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3746bbeab8ea015d000050lamb4866Sat, 11 Feb 2012 23:57:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3746bbeab8ea015d000050
WHY DO WE SPADE AND NUETER CATS AND DOGS? Because they cannot say no! What are we saying about humanity when we chemically or mechanically spade and neuter ourselves. We cannot say no? Really! Doesn't contraception just promote wreckless irresponsible sex...which leads to STDS, which leads to increase in unwanted pregnancies, which leads to single mothers... On...and on... Doesn't contraception just promote sexual addiction.... If you can't say no to alcohol we call is alcoholism.... How do you deal with it... Take a pill so you can still drink as much as you want wrecklessly? Come on! Human beings are not animals without the ability to think. The contraceptive mentality behind the contraceptive approach to sex is total encouraging selfishness. Even if we think it's for family planning we are fooling ourselves. Most women cry headache because they are used to being used by their husband who can't control himself. Women are persons NOT SEX TOYS. Sex is a giving of persons in love union of marriage NOT an event of gimmi some pleasure! Have sex, when you want, any time you want withhout ever having to say no! Is this really healthy? Especially for teens? Porn....sex is holy and when it is treated so casually like entertainment it is destructive. AIDES...STDS... ARE RAMPID, COME ON. We cannot normalize what is very destructive for humanity. The fruits of wreckless sex have devastated families and as long as we teach the mentality of contraception people, especially teens will be abused and hurt.... Also... Abortion is a last resort contraception. Let's not play games with this... People in our country are suffering from major sexual addiction... Porn is multi billion dollar industry that destroys the dignity of women...
What contraception promotes is NOT love! What contraception promotes is 50 percent plus divorce rates, STDS, AIDES, UNWANTED PREGNANCIES, DATE RAPE, PORN, on and on... Misuse sex and you misuse persons, misuse persons and you destroy marriages and family's and ultimately society! Dangerous.....PROGRESS? Definite but in the wrong direction... We want virtuous people NOT HEDONISTShttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3740d7eab8ea095d00003fMMSat, 11 Feb 2012 23:32:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3740d7eab8ea095d00003f
Your opinion that the Church is impractical since "people can't afford 13 kids these days" is based on mistaken assumptions. That 98 % of Catholics ignore the Magisterial Teaching of the Church regarding the use of artificial contraception actually has more to do with the lack of clear teaching by clergy from the pulpit along with the nonstop misinformation campaign in secular society by those like Planned Parenthood who preach anti-christian views of sexuality, marriage and family.
Given the 98 % statistic, it's obvious that the majority of US Catholics have been swept up by these secular influences.It is also obvious that the US Bishops are failing at getting their clergy to get the authentic teaching out there to the laity.
While the Catholic Church has always taught that children are the supreme gift of marriage and that Catholic couples should be open to life and generous, the Church also teaches that couples practice responsible parenthood.
It's a no brainer, the world has changed a lot in 2000 years, but the Catholic teaching on marriage has remained unchanged. Couples who have serious reasons for avoiding pregnancy are encouraged by the Church to use NFP.
Study after study has shown NFP to be up to 99 percent effective for couples avoiding pregnancy. There are currently more than 4 million couples using NFP in China to avoid pregnancy with an overall success rate of 98+ percent (this is as effective as the pill).
It is ironic that China, a country with a coercive, one-child only policy is able to get the message out about NFP, and that it is acceptable because it is practical, while Catholics and others here in the US remain ignorant or misinformed.
The point here is that NFP is effective and that Church teaching is not only practical, it is the answer to a couple's need to be responsible parents within marriage . The fact that people remain uninformed is a problem that needs to be addressed. Your statement is evidence of that.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3737e669bedd6512000053JeremySat, 11 Feb 2012 22:54:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3737e669bedd6512000053
This whole article implies that the world would be better off with the tens or hundreds of millions of unwanted pregnancies that would have happened without birth control. Right?
And Paul VI *clearly* understood cause and effect:
1) "General lowering of moral standards"
Right. Because men and women looked at the availability of birth control and used that as the barometer of their personal morality.
2) "A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy"
Because people said "I can get birth control. That means I don't have to be faithful to my spouse! I wouldn't have cheated otherwise!"
*AND*
The availability of *BIRTH CONTROL* leads to...illegitimate children?! Apparently removing access to contraceptives eliminates the desire to fornicate. Thanks John VI for clearing that one up.
3) "The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men."
Of course. Because women have absolutely no agency whatsoever in a sexual situation. They are obligated to comply with any man's sexual inclinations.
4) "Government coercion in reproductive matters."
Naturally. Because the government making access to birth control legal means EVERYONE MUST TAKE THE PILL! If it's legal then it is no longer voluntary!!!! You must use it!!!! No one has the choice to use it or not use it. The government has coerced you to into using birth control!!!
Look, if you don't want to use birth control then don't use it. It's every individual's personal choice. But don't cast aspersions on a person's morality if they choose to use it. Religious doctrine and morality are not the same thing.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36d76deab8eafa1e00001bBeckySat, 11 Feb 2012 16:02:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36d76deab8eafa1e00001b
Henry, you have no idea what you're talking about. You don't change something that's true just because more and more people disobey it. The Church isn't a business or an organization; it was started by Christ. And Christ is the Son of God. People don't want to believe that. Some people don't know it. Some people know and don't care either way. But it is what it is. So the Church isn't in the position to change its stance just because a bunch of her flock continue to wander off. "Oh, okay, I guess they know where they're going, heading for that cliff, let's just follow." Please! And the Church isn't saying that people should have 13 children. FYI: a woman can't get pregnant every time she has sex with a man. And sex isn't a need. Couples can and should abstain for good reasons -- one person is sick, the woman has just had a baby, or maybe for a time period, they aren't in a position to have a baby. Our society has become so sex-addicted that it thinks people can't help themselves. They must have sex whenever, with whomever, whereever, and so the best solution is to just make sure the woman becomes a vending machine for this sex-on-demand mentality by giving her a Pill that completely mutilates her perfectly working design that is beautifully and wonderfully made. Now we can have sex whenever and take the normal result, pregnancy--when it's biologically possible based on the woman's normal fertile cycle--out of the equation. Stupid logic. Having sex wihout an understanding and appreciation for the fact that reproduction is part of the two purposes of sex (the other being the unity of the spouses, not recreation for drunk guy and drunk girl for one-night stand) is a disorder. A woman with bulimia has a disordered understanding and appreciation of food and the biological design. Food is not meant to be consumed and then thrown up after it's been "used" for pleasure. Birth control has allowed men, presumably like you, to "use" women for personal satisfaction and then just throw them up. It's a shame. And it's the biggest lie ever fed to woman to act like somehow they've become empowered by this opportunity to use medicine, which is normally used to fix what is broken, to break their perfectly working fertility. Shame on men like you for remaining adolescents.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36d224eab8eaab0400004fAndrew ZeiselSat, 11 Feb 2012 15:40:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36d224eab8eaab0400004f
Or people could just not have sex apart from its two functions, unification and procreation? Sex is great, like all things, insofar as it was created by God. But just because sex exists and it is good doesn't mean we can use it whenever we want. Exercise is good (in moderation and in the appropriate time and place (It would be bad to jog outside when it is -30 degrees outside). An ice cream Sunday is great, after a meal and once a week; if I indulge too often bad effects follow.
The Church doesn't have to change, the only question is whether or not the Church's stance on contraception is true, if so, as the article shows, she doesn't have to change, you do; and it just so happens that your natural and supernatural happiness depend on it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36a30a69bedddb65000019ColleenSat, 11 Feb 2012 12:19:06 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36a30a69bedddb65000019
are you saying that the Catholic Church and the other organizations such as Catholic schools gets money from the government? because they don't, i went to Catholic school for 11 years, we got little to no government funding (the little government funding we got was for textbooks because it was a state requirement), we didn't have money for air conditioning or heat, the money we received was from our diocese and alumni donations...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36a1ff6bb3f72f3e000002ColleenSat, 11 Feb 2012 12:14:39 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36a1ff6bb3f72f3e000002
good article, so true and i agree with what you said about men using women as objects instead of people (i've seen it happen one too many times), God bless you! =)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36926769bedd7d3a00003cA (Andrea) SmithSat, 11 Feb 2012 11:08:07 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36926769bedd7d3a00003c
Whether or not you are offended by something has nothing to do with how you treat the individuals (please note: the individuals--not the issue) on the other side. I speak up vigorously for my beliefs and you are free to do the same. However, it is better not to attack individuals, but to attack issues. I will not say, for example, that President Obama is an idiot and hates children--I do not believe saying something like that would be fair, even if I felt it was true. I will say I do not agree with his policies for specific reasons. I don't think it is being condescending or dictatorial to ask for a little human respect.
If you don't mind, you might read over what I said in the first place--because I didn't say anything about forcing things on people who did not ask for my input. I never said, for example, that people should be FORCED not to use contraception (although I of course wish that people who call themselves Catholic would actually follow the rules of the Catholic church, a church no one is forced to enter). And no one should be offended by the idea that humanity (though made good) was fundamentally flawed by the Original Sin--we all recognize our tendencies to sloth, lust, gluttony, selfishness, etc. in ourselves. How can we not notice our weaknesses in these areas? So to say that some individuals, who are flawed, cannot corrupt an entire institution, is valid. Otherwise, we might easily say, for example, that the office of the President of the United States has become meaningless, corrupt, etc., simply because we have had SOME poor presidents. (And the USA was never given a "the gates of hell shall not prevail" promise :)).
At any rate, I feel that anyone, regardless of his or her opinion on the use of contraception, etc. can oppose this mandate simply because it is so unconstitutional. That is one of the reasons why its opposition is gaining so much support--people do not want to see their freedoms taken away. Thank God they are willing to fight for their constitutional rights. Maybe we'll get attacked in the process, but that's okay. You are right that the truth hurts. But it also heals.
Again, God bless you!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f367dc069beddc613000041StacieSat, 11 Feb 2012 09:40:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f367dc069beddc613000041
Henry,
Human beings are members of the animal kingdom but of the highest order. We do not do all things out of instinct. Hormones are powerful things and adults can control them. The Church does not call all families to have 13 children and so periodic abstinence allows adults to manage the size of their family. Family size becomes a shared responsibility and sacrifice for both parents. It requires maturity and communication. Ooops, maybe we don't want mature, self sacrificing adults as parents to model these things for their children. It isn't outdated. It is actually very simple: when you use contradiction you treat a fully functioning and healthy body as diseased. It is not. Anything good worth doing takes effort. Relationships and children are the same: the take effort to create and maintain. If it wre easy, everyone would be doing it. Ooopps, I guess that is where we are.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36784169bedd4205000044JerrySat, 11 Feb 2012 09:16:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36784169bedd4205000044
Add a comment..."...women lose their sex drive after being on the pill."
The pill suppresses ovulation by convincing the body that it's pregnant (and it has a backup abortifacient component to prevent implantation of a fertilized ovum, ie, conceived child). Not only does it suppress the sex drive of the woman, but there is ample research to suggest that ovulating women are more attractive to men than are pregnant and non-ovulating women.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3676cceab8ea8d6700000cJerrySat, 11 Feb 2012 09:10:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3676cceab8ea8d6700000c
Add a comment...If you don't understand the argument, then you've missed the point of the article. Pope Paul VI "warned of four results if the widespread use of contraceptives was accepted:
General lowering of moral standards[yes indeed!]
A rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy [yes indeed!]
The reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men.[ya think?!]"
So if the widespread use of contraception caused (or at least contributed to) these results, how would more contraception solve these problems? And if you accept the Guttmacher Institute's figures of "98% of Catholic women use contraception" (highly suspect: GI is part of Planned Parenthood: largest abortion provider in the US, hands out contraception like candy--beneficiaries of the new HHS rule?), that leaves only 2% of Catholics (25% of the US population) as an untapped market for expanded contraceptive use--is that the solution to our societal ills?
By your logic, we can reduce crime even further by just aborting 100% of minority and low income children, since they commit a proportionately higher amount of criminal acts. Or, we can eliminate all crime by eliminating all people; this is an obviously absurd proposition, but it does follow your logic.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3643976bb3f78e1800000eRandom Home-Schooled DudeSat, 11 Feb 2012 05:31:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3643976bb3f78e1800000e
I thought that I might note that you stated one of the major reason's many people fail at NFP. That is the "spontaneity" that you mentioned. One of the major reasons that NFP fails is because people lack the degrees of self-control needed to follow the program. Its not that you can't have sex its just that you have to control when you have sex. One of my life long buddies who just got married about two or so years ago just had his first kid. They used the program to aid in fertility; while objectively if you looked at his parents they had about all of his siblings at two to three year spaced intervals and were therefore using the program to prevent conception. Also, in relation to what you said about financial stability, it depends on what you consider a financially stable environment because although I may be one of 10 children, 7 of which are adopted, we have never lacked for anything or had any wants that were not left unfulfilled in some way. We don't live like kings but it is because my parents knew their plan before they started their own family and have continued to follow it; mind you we have hit a bumpy spot here or there but that is to be assumed when shit hits the fan speaking from an economical standpoint of the last few years. The reason why my parents have been successful is because they planned out their finances so they could have kids soon after they got married. Before it is presumed that we are uneducated or something similar I though that I might note that my mom went to a state college and me and several of my other siblings are currently attending college. By the way here is an article about large families that my family got included into.
<a href="http://www.somdnews.com/article/20120127/NEWS/701279880&template=southernMaryland" target="_blank">http://www.somdnews.com/article/20120127/NEWS/701279880&template=southernMaryland</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f362ebe6bb3f7fd60000047Robert Andrew ShowalterSat, 11 Feb 2012 04:02:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f362ebe6bb3f7fd60000047
Giving this some thought, the article is assumes some kind of sexual-moral degeneration in the last 40 years. Technically 150 or so years ago, brothels were common in most mining towns. Prostitution has largely become illegal, so really things have become somewhat mild since the old days. Further, the "sexual revolution" had many positive aspects for women, such as breaking the patriarchal dominance that men have held over women in jobs, family, and life in general. Of course, I think a lot of people don't want the women to have any kind of power; they think they ought to just be relegated to baby-making machines subservient to their husbands.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36169b69bedd9938000087Donna GratehouseSat, 11 Feb 2012 02:19:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f36169b69bedd9938000087
This "discussion" is worthless and offensive. A bunch of prudes opining about how horrible it is that women have birth control.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3615786bb3f7d246000024Donna GratehouseSat, 11 Feb 2012 02:15:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3615786bb3f7d246000024
The entire premise of this article and most of the responses praising it are offensive to me. And if you and your cohorts can make condescending and dictatorial pronouncements on how your fellow humans (who never asked for your input BTW) should behave then I can surely speculate on what might motivate that. And when a guy like Thomas goes on and on about young women having sex it's perfectly reasonable to conclude that he thinks about young women and sex. A lot.
If the truth hurts, too bad.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3610d9eab8ea362900000fMCSat, 11 Feb 2012 01:55:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3610d9eab8ea362900000f
Donna--your comment adds nothing to this discussion and is very offensive.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f360dcc69bedd442a0000e7Marissa CSat, 11 Feb 2012 01:42:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f360dcc69bedd442a0000e7
It's called NFP...and it works.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35f3e96bb3f77d0600003bASmithFri, 10 Feb 2012 23:51:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35f3e96bb3f77d0600003b
Donna Gratehouse--
Please restrain yourself from making ad Hominum and immature comments--such as the one above insinuating that a fellow poster thinks about "nubile young women" a lot. The more respect you give others, the more dignity you preserve in yourself. This is not about agreement--you can respect your enemies, too. I respect you enough to ask you to present yourself at your best, and not at your worst. God bless you.
For the record, I am a Catholic. I believe the HHS mandate is 100% unconstitutional and, if not challenged, will only lead to more death and destruction--and perhaps some laws people who don't have a problem with contraception might object more to (such as a mandate that would require employers to pay for euthanasia "rights"--you are forewarned). Others have stated the argument against contraception better than I can, so I will not repeat their statements. I will only say that all humanity is flawed, therefore there absolutely will be men and women in the Catholic Church who are flawed and who sin terribly (such as the abusive priests). However, it is a logical fallacy to say that the flaws of some men or women make the institution an evil force. Christ said that the gates of Hell would never prevail against the Church--and they never will. The Church is not fighting FOR Victory, as Fr. Frank Pavone would say--the Church is fighting FROM Victory. Our Lord Jesus Christ won the battle over sin and death. We are simply fighting to bring as many souls as possible into that victory. God bless you!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35e90cecad045743000023joe astaritaFri, 10 Feb 2012 23:05:32 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35e90cecad045743000023
Add a comment.. Henry's comments are absurd. When I was growing up no one used contraceptives and most people had 4 7 kids, not 13. would we be better off if families were larger and less spoiled. would it keep mom and dad together more, I think so. are people happier doing contraceptive sex? it does not seem so.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35e74569bedd8a6500000cKatieFri, 10 Feb 2012 22:57:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35e74569bedd8a6500000c
Catholocism is not a denomination. Only the Christian religions that are offshoots of Catholocism are denominations.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35dc3cecad048635000013WPDiddyFri, 10 Feb 2012 22:10:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35dc3cecad048635000013
@Blodget- Pot, meet kettle. You need to be more open minded and flexible with your thinking.
Ever heard of NFP? As a practicing Catholic who doesn't have 13 kids you sound about as ignorant on this issue as well, just about everybody else who doesn't practice it.
Besides if the Church based it's Theology on the winds of the day, it would eventually have to reverse position as the winds changed.
Good thing you're not a Theology professor. Stick to your day job and leave the critical thinking to the moral theologians.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35d53aeab8eaf938000007ChristieFri, 10 Feb 2012 21:40:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35d53aeab8eaf938000007
Be careful, one needs to look at the RATE of population growth, not the population itself. It is not exponential, or even linear. In fact, the rate slows down over time. If I remember correctly, the time frame during which the 6th adn 7th billions of humans were added to the population were the same. Adding a billion to five billion in the same time a billion is added to six billion indicates that the reproduction rate has decreased dramatically, and much to the detriment of many nations (note China, as well as most of Europe where they are now giving incentives for families to have more children).
Furthermore, the Catholic Church upholds eternal truths; the passing of 2000 years is irrelevant. The Church certainly does not propose the married husbands and wives have 13 children (or any number for that matter). The Church calls married couples to be open to life AND to be prudent. The size of one individual family is between the husband, wife, and God. Some couples choose to be open at all times and accept as many children as they happen to receive. Natural Family Planning (NFP) is also an option, as it is morally upright, and allows the husband and wife to have ongoing communication regarding whether or not they are called to be open to new life as they observe the woman's signs of fertility. For this reason, many couples practicing NFP do choose to be open more often and do have larger families, but the larger families are not due to a failure of the method. There are several different methods of NFP that are used effectively (as effectively as hormonal contraception, 99+%) around the world, even in third world countries. It is very effective in helping women to know and understand their bodies which allows them to identify and get help for any problems or irregularities. It also helps couples to achieve pregnancy when having difficulty. It also allows couples to avoid pregnancy when they feel called to; some couples avoid pregnancy because of life-threatening situations, successfully. Not to mention that the divorce rate among couples practicing NFP is less than 5% (some studies indicate less than 3%). There is more to know than can be shared here. Please find the information and education. The Church helps her children to live fully free lives, but only in seeking and living the truth in obedience does one come to know the freedom it offers. Christ came that all might have life and have it to the full.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35ce276bb3f71f41000049Paul BFri, 10 Feb 2012 21:10:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35ce276bb3f71f41000049
Oh my God. It's true. There is at least ONE pair of brave and intelligent honest intelligent reporters in the US. This is startling. He even dares to suggest that maybe, just maybe, we're not nearly as together or nearly as happy or nearly as fulfilled, having separated ourselves from our own children. And abortion.
If one , as Galileo (who historians point out was NOT taken to task for his defence of the 70 year old Copernican theory) and Isaac Newton. adopts the wonderfuly informative and enlightening perspectives available still tday from the geniuses of Greek philosophy particularly , modern Aristotelianism or Thomism, e.g. Mortimer Adler's wonderful books, one can even come away from such study with the firm apprehension that life is meaningful rich and wonderful. And not at all hopeless or loveless.
Such themes are found in this brave , brave article which like Dr Green at Harvard and Hearst of the UNAIDS group had the incredible courage to actually come out and tell us that the Catholic church is also right in warning us not to trust the plastics industries and those who tie aid money to them, to end the misery and tragedy of our time, AIDS.
I am shocked a the courage of these brave writers. How very, very rare such honesty is.
Humble kudos with thanks.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c941ecad045313000007MMFri, 10 Feb 2012 20:49:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c941ecad045313000007
Your opinion that the Church is impractical since "people can't afford 13 kids these days" is based on mistaken assumptions. That 98 % of Catholics ignore the Magisterial Teaching of the Church regarding the use of artificial contraception actually has more to do with the lack of clear teaching by clergy from the pulpit along with the nonstop misinformation campaign in secular society by those like Planned Parenthood who preach anti-christian views of sexuality, marriage and family.
Given the 98 % statistic, it's obvious that the majority of US Catholics have been swept up by these secular influences.It is also obvious that the US Bishops are failing at getting their clergy to get the authentic teaching out there to the laity.
While the Catholic Church has always taught that children are the supreme gift of marriage and that Catholic couples should be open to life and generous, the Church also teaches that couples practice responsible parenthood.
It's a no brainer, the world has changed a lot in 2000 years, but the Catholic teaching on marriage has remained unchanged. Couples who have serious reasons for avoiding pregnancy are encouraged by the Church to use NFP.
Study after study has shown NFP to be up to 99 percent effective for couples avoiding pregnancy. There are currently more than 4 million couples using NFP in China to avoid pregnancy with an overall success rate of 98+ percent (this is as effective as the pill).
It is ironic that China, a country with a coercive, one-child only policy is able to get the message out about NFP, and hat it is acceptable because it is practical, while Catholics and others here in the US remain ignorant or misinformed.
The point here is that NFP is effective and that Church teaching is not only practical, it is the answer to a couple's need to be responsible parents within marriage . The fact that people remain uninformed is a problem that needs to be addressed. Your statement is evidence of that.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c8d9ecad04380b000026Follower of Jesus ChristFri, 10 Feb 2012 20:48:09 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c8d9ecad04380b000026
This was meant to be posted for you... but somehow it was misdirected...Ma'am, there is absolutely NO sin on Earth that Jesus Christ cannot forgive you for!!! It is only in Jesus Christ you are saved, "For there is no other name under Heaven given to man that which he might be saved," and believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and God has pardoned your sins. I know you are Catholic, but believe me please, you cannot save yourself, saying rosaries does not make you more holy to God. Only Jesus Christ is worthy to save and only God is holy. You cannot make yourself better, holier, or more righteous without Jesus. I say this to you with all the love in my heart to you, and with all sincerity. Trust me, Jesus Christ is the love of my life and I seek only Him, He has not let me down although I fail daily to live out His will, He knows I am weak. I love you because Jesus Christ loves you. And I am telling you right now, God is saying to you that you can be saved!!! Have faith in Jesus Christ, only Jesus. Nothing else, no man, no priest, can save you except God Himself. He is knocking at your door. Romans 10:9-13 "if myou confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, sbestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” The very word for redemption mean that God never asks what we have done for him, in fact he bought us to set us free. If you believe this to be true, then have faith, and do not justify yourself anymore because you are justified by your faith. This is all God requires of you. Jesus loves all sinners, including you and me. No man is above sin except Jesus, who is God.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c7c96bb3f7303900002cFollower of Jesus ChristFri, 10 Feb 2012 20:43:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c7c96bb3f7303900002c
Ma'am, there is absolutely NO sin on Earth that Jesus Christ cannot forgive you for!!! It is only in Jesus Christ you are saved, "For there is no other name under Heaven given to man that which he might be saved," and believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and God has pardoned your sins. I know you are Catholic, but believe me please, you cannot save yourself, saying rosaries does not make you more holy to God. Only Jesus Christ is worthy to save and only God is holy. You cannot make yourself better, holier, or more righteous without Jesus. I say this to you with all the love in my heart to you, and with all sincerity. Trust me, Jesus Christ is the love of my life and I seek only Him, He has not let me down although I fail daily to live out His will, He knows I am weak. I love you because Jesus Christ loves you. And I am telling you right now, God is saying to you that you can be saved!!! Have faith in Jesus Christ, only Jesus. Nothing else, no man, no priest, can save you except God Himself. He is knocking at your door. Romans 10:9-13 "if myou confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. 11 For the Scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.” 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, sbestowing his riches on all who call on him. 13 For everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” The very word for redemption mean that God never asks what we have done for him, in fact he bought us to set us free. If you believe this to be true, then have faith, and do not justify yourself anymore because you are justified by your faith. This is all God requires of you. Jesus loves all sinners, including you and me. No man is above sin except Jesus, who is God.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c3f369beddbb1a00000bThinking...Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:27:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35c3f369beddbb1a00000b
"Do not deprive one another, except perhaps by agreement for a limited time, that you may devote yourselves to prayer; but then come together again, so that Satan may not tempt you because of your lack of self-control." (1 Cor. 7:5)
"If anyone thinks that he is not behaving properly toward his betrothed,11 if his12 passions are strong, and it has to be, let him do as he wishes: let them marry—it is no sin." (1 Cor. 7:36) I know that some of you think that if you have too many children, then the husband and wife should separate. I also know that some of you think that sex should only be for pro-creation. Here are two verses I would like for you to consider.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bff76bb3f7332d000022DMFFri, 10 Feb 2012 20:10:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bff76bb3f7332d000022
Hooray....someone finally presents a sane, intelligent defense on why the Church as been right all along. Economies boom when there are more people; there are more jobs, Social Security funds burgeon when there are more wage earners. We are a nation going into eclipse. Demographics indicate that a nation that does not replace itself has reached the point of irreversible decline economically and culturally. All of Europe will soon be Muslim nations, and Europe's historical cultures and heritage will be lost. Only babies and large families contribute to the balance of cultures and nations. From the moral aspect, when you allow the conjugal act to produce the fruit God intended, all kinds of blessings accrue to families and nations alike. God is a God of abundance. Our narrow, self-serving concupiscence has brought moral and national destruction to our country.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bfac69bedd6e02000034Thinking...Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:09:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bfac69bedd6e02000034
Hey guys! I am protestant... but what does that matter? We are all the bride of Christ, the church, and I will see you guys in heaven someday, so what does that matter? This article has made me think, and I agree that birth control has had some influence on corrupting society. But don't you think that perhaps the technology, ease of anonymous access on the internet, and speedy communication has perhaps spread and encouraged more anti-religious thoughts and supported more immorality than the contraception? Sodom and Gomorrah were extremely corrupt in many ways that America now is, and obviously they degraded women (I think they just degraded everyone in society by their crazy sexuality) and yet they did not have access to birth control. Another thought, in the Bible, we are to avoid sexual immorality at all costs. Apostle Paul mentioned this numerous times! Birth control isn't even remotely mentioned in the New Testament but I'll ignore that. However, Paul says that if a man cannot control himself around his betrothed, then let them marry! It is better to be married than burn in lust. But this is hard if a man and woman cannot yet support a family, but want to be married, if they are unable to because they are not ready for a family, won't this cause them to sin? This happened to me! I love my husband so much!! And yes we honored God with our marriage and did not sleep together before, but if we couldn't be married, the temptation is too strong! We can hardly support ourselves, not to mention a baby that would probably be on the way. But I do disagree with the use of the pill, it has had much research done that says not only is it carcinogenic, but it has caused unintended abortions. But why not condoms? God tells us to be fruitful, but if we have children eventually, how is this violating it? There is a story in the Bible of a man who dies and leaves his wife behind, his brother takes the wife to have children for her, instead he uses her body and spills his semen on the ground and this is considered evil. This is the only example I can pull from the Bible to counter my own argument. So I will think about this, but it remains very unconvincing to me. Remember, we live by grace and not by the law, what we are convicted of by God should be taken very seriously. Yet I remain not convicted. Trust me, I am deeply considering this, and will take this to God in prayer, but I do not feel like condoms are wrong. I am pretty calm about this, because different Christian perspectives are listed in the Bible, that say some may feel convinced that eating meat is wrong and only eat vegetables, while another man who eats meat remains unconvicted in his own heart (1 Cor. 8:13). So I am not troubled by this subject at all actually, and I do not think it is wrong if a person thinks that perhaps using contraception is sin, because it might be to them. I am not saying that sin varies per person, but I am saying that some people think different things are right according to their conscience. But I don't think this should be pushed on all people. I think that the picture "sin twice, use a condom" is offensive. Remember it is not our job to judge those outside the church, so please please please don't judge people who do use the pill! People who do have abortions, do drugs, and everything you don't do and such, these people should not be judged, if you judge, then Jesus will judge you, and who wants that? We all know we've fallen short of the glory of God. Those in the church are a different story though. I have seen that some of you have been divisive, and this frustrates me. How can you have any pride over being Catholic than Protestant, does our walk with the Lord vary between these two sects? I have known other Protestants who have also criticized Catholics, many actually. And I see it here too with Catholics, remember Jesus commands us not to be divisive! We are all a part of the flock, and I want to stress that we are all the bride of Christ! If you are taking the command "be fruitful and multiply" to mean that we cannot use birth control for a period of time, please take the direct command "If people are causing divisions among you, give a first and second warning. After that, have nothing more to do with them" Titus 3:10 literally. Other than this, I am glad the article was posted if it leads people to Christ, even if the article doesn't mention Christ, let's make our comments at least reflect him.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bcffecad04c87d00000eJPaFri, 10 Feb 2012 19:57:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bcffecad04c87d00000e
With all due respect, the Catholic Church is not just "any organization or company." The Catholic Church cannot change her teachings because they are not hers to change. They are Jesus Christ's, who "is the same yesterday, today, and forever" (Heb. 13:8). We're not dealing with a human institution here.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bcb4ecad04c37500002fMicha ElyiFri, 10 Feb 2012 19:56:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35bcb4ecad04c37500002f
You're both wrong. The Catholic hospitals test to see if ovulation has recently occurred. You see, scientifically a new life begins at conception not implantation.
Maybe you weren't told but both hospitals and empirical science are inventions of Catholics. They know what they're doing, even if the non-Catholic hospitals in your area don't.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35a95969bedd7a5f000023Greg CFri, 10 Feb 2012 18:33:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35a95969bedd7a5f000023
Don't worry your little heart, Historical.
<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/mar/13/catholicism.religion" target="_blank">http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2000/mar/13/catholicism.religion</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35a81beab8eaac6000003dseekingmytribeFri, 10 Feb 2012 18:28:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35a81beab8eaac6000003d
We don't want or have 13 kids and we don't use artificial birth control. (We have three, spaced a few years apart, each.) Instead we use self control. Free, healthy and *gasp* in short supply in our "do what feels good ALL THE TIME and damn the consequences" society. Natural Family Planning attracts all kinds of people, including those not willing to drug or surgically alter their bodies in order to avoid biology. And yes, Catholics that have the intellectual honestly to follow their church's edicts if they choose to belong to said church.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35a5fc6bb3f7f50200003cGreg CFri, 10 Feb 2012 18:19:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35a5fc6bb3f7f50200003c
If it's any help, DeDe, the Catholics that I know were disgusted by Cardinal Egan's redaction.
Mark Shea of National Catholic Register fame wrote a piece bluntly titled, "Cardinal Egan is a Disgrace" (<a href="http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/02/cardinal-egan-is-a-disgrace.html" target="_blank">http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2012/02/cardinal-egan-is-a-disgrace.html</a>).http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f359d09eab8ea584600002bemmbeeFri, 10 Feb 2012 17:41:13 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f359d09eab8ea584600002b
The house is in order do you know that it is less than 2% of the the priests that have abused. But in our own school system it is between 8-9%. So who need s to get their house in order ,.....http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35976e6bb3f7796200002dJennifer ArchambaultFri, 10 Feb 2012 17:17:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35976e6bb3f7796200002d
First, as a practicing Catholic and happily married woman, I don't have 13 children. I don't have these 13 children because my husband and I use NFP which is church approved. So this bogus excuse that we cannot learn about our own bodies and decide when we are ready for more children without offending God is absolutely that. BOGUS.
Now on to the reason that contracepting is bad for marriages. We have been given one of the most wonderful gifts from God, our fertility. God joins forces with mothers and fathers in performing the act of creation. When you circumvent this capability with brutal measures such as tubal ligation's, vasectomy's, IUD's or even the pill which carries it's own nasty risks, you are removing God from your marriage. Not only that, but you are saying to your spouse, I love you except for that fertility thing. Women are objectified in our society, because that's all they have become....objects of pleasure. No pregnancy to worry about! They were put here to satisfy, that's it. Deep down there is a lack in marriages because of this mindset. Just take a look at the divorce rate since the introduction of the pill.
Lastly, there is an entire level of communication that happens between a husband and wife that doesn't happen any other way. Using contraception silences that communication. The church is not wrong on this issue. They have over 2,000 years of experience in the study of humanity. How many years of study have you got?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358f78eab8eae526000043AnitaFri, 10 Feb 2012 16:43:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358f78eab8eae526000043
Most Catholics use birth control? I didn't know that Cafeteria 'Catholics' and individuals who don't even believe in Catholicism counted as believers. By the way environmentalism needs to be scrutinized. The concept of overpopulation is almost as bad as that of AGW. Even if Catholics reproduced as rabbits there wouldn't be overpopulation because religious people control their population rates through mortality and wars in contrast to seculars who seem to have a fondness for controlling population rates through birth (e.g. abortions, contraception). Liberals prefer killing unborn children while protecting adult criminals whereas conservatives protect little chidlren while preferring to kill adults. Everybody controls population you know, they just do it differently duh!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358de2ecad04d52400001fAnastasiaFri, 10 Feb 2012 16:36:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358de2ecad04d52400001f
you know, the world has change a lot in 2000 years... but your argument "the Church should accomodate to the times" is probably 2000 years old... probably that is what the Romans said, too... where are they now? Ever wonder why the Church is still here and all the ones that wanted it to "accomodate" are long buried and gone?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358c0d6bb3f79550000027David FaberFri, 10 Feb 2012 16:28:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358c0d6bb3f79550000027
"In fact, the Church would argue if you [have 13 kids] and don't have the means to support those kids, you're also in grave error."
False, the Church does not now and never has taught that there is an obligation to avoid having children.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358a87eab8eaee2600002dMargaretFri, 10 Feb 2012 16:22:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f358a87eab8eaee2600002d
Actually, the Church HAS changed with the circumstances. In 1968 they accepted Natural Family Planning as a morally acceptable way to postpone pregnancy and control family size. Since then, the ineffective "rhythm method" of old has morphed into a variety of natural methods (Sympto-thermal, Billings, Creighton, etc) which if correctly taught and used, have effectiveness rates to rival barrier and hormonal contraceptives. So now practicing Catholics have a safe, effective, morally acceptable way to keep their family size congruent to their ability to afford/manage it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3581526bb3f7224600000alike-mindFri, 10 Feb 2012 15:42:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3581526bb3f7224600000a
@Steve Skojec, I respect your argument. I agree that by far the preferred environment for raising children is to be found within a stable marriage. I also believe that the Church's admonition of 'sex only within marriage' is utterly unattainable. When I was a kid, everyone really felt that God was looking over their shoulder if they were thinking of doing something unapproved -- that was an era when people confessed to wrong-doing, as good for the Soul.
That era is long-gone, until such time in the advanced future when the pendulum might swing back. If you take a 24-hr survey of shows on TV, you'll find that being boyfriend and girlfriend connotes that it is a sexually active relationship, and any outliers are either pre-teen or "30-yr old virgins". I consider it a shame that wholesomeness is passe, in a world where Miley Cyrus, for instance, graduates from the Disney Channel kids fame, to harlot status and stripper pole dancing. The norm for the present world is debauchery, but I don't lay this at the feet of birth control, but rather the fact that advertisers and entertainers know that sex sells, and their attendant one-upmanship in just how sleazy they can go to grab attention. I see no way of imposing abstinence on a large enough scale to bend the curve on out-of-wedlock births.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357fdd6bb3f73a44000004JanineFri, 10 Feb 2012 15:36:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357fdd6bb3f73a44000004
The Church is not like any organization or company. It is founded by Jesus Christ, who is God..so it's going to go with what He says is the Truth...which I'd say is a smart move. Also, there is a reason why women aren't fertile every day of their cycle. We have cycles and we can monitor them to know when we are fertile. If there is a serious reason to not have a child at the moment (eg. the mother has cancer etc) the couple can choose to abstain from sex during that fertile period. Alternatively, the couple can use the knowledge of her fertile period to help her become pregnant. Methods such as the Sympto-Thermal Method (STM) are just as effective as oral contraceptives when used correctly. Natural Family Planning is much different from contraception and it is approved and promoted by the Church. For more information on serious reasons and why it is different from contraception you can read this: <a href="http://www.ewtn.com/expert/expertfaqframe.asp?source=/vexperts/conference.htm" target="_blank">http://www.ewtn.com/expert/expertfaqframe.asp?source=/vexperts/conference.htm</a>
Thank you for you time.
Janine Chaves
University of Guelphhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357c80ecad04ad0100002eSteve SkojecFri, 10 Feb 2012 15:22:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357c80ecad04ad0100002e
It would be foolish to disagree with you that the ladies are not the only ones to blame. It takes two, as they say, to "tango." I never said that.
However, the idea that providing people with more contraception and more sex education is going to lead to less out-of-wedlock babies is pretty hard to fathom. The activity that leads to babies, is, ironically, sex. And the more sex people have (feeling empowered and protected by their little arsenal of prophylactics, pills, contraptions, hormones, etc.) out of wedlock, the more (wait for it!) likely it is that one of those methods will fail, leading to an out of wedlock child.
Just as the surest way to avoid shooting someone is not pulling the trigger (or handling the gun at all, for that matter), the surest way to avoid conceiving when you don't want to is to avoid the whole sex thing.
This is why the Catholic Church also teaches that the only appropriate context for sex is marriage. People who are married tend to think having kid at some point is fairly normal, even if it isn't planned, what with the lifelong commitment they made and the effort to have a stable relationship and stable home.
It's not a perfect system, but then, what is?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357ad6eab8ea5f7e000022:/ Really?Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:15:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357ad6eab8ea5f7e000022
Amanda - "Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35786becad04540a000003:/ Really?Fri, 10 Feb 2012 15:04:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35786becad04540a000003
You should do some more reading on Lutherans vs. AnaBaptists. Zwingli (et al) hated fellow Christians. AnaBaptists were drowned in Lake Geneva because they differed from the marjority of Protestants at the time that only professing adults should be baptized. The Catholic Church has its closets - and the closets have plenty of skeletons... but so does every other church, denomination and congregation among the Protestant world.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3577b4eab8ea100300001clike-mindFri, 10 Feb 2012 15:01:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3577b4eab8ea100300001c
@SteveSkojec, not at all, my point is the road to Hell was already being traveled, into a secular age reflecting more license and less concern for self-restraint, and ought not to be laid at the feet of birth control as the cause.
It is misguided to blame solely the ladies for out-of-wedlock pregnancies because they didn't make themselves pregnant via voodoo or something: half of the cause of the troubling statistic are the men who impregnated them, and then didn't marry them. I suggest a more enlightened conceptualization of this issue is that if birth control were in every bathroom cabinet, and accurate sex education common knowledge, then THAT would reduce the out-of-wedlock statistics.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35771569beddc86d00002c:/ Really?Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:59:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35771569beddc86d00002c
As one raised Protestant and confirmed Catholic 30 years later... Luther raised many excellent points. The Church was suffering from many problems - but the Church makes decisions and changes as a global institution. Who was Luther, a monk in Germany, to demand or even expect a response from Rome? It is synonomous with a private in the army sending the Penatgon some great suggestions as to how to better dig latrines and fight battles...
Even if 100% correct - the private should have no expectation as to the implementation or the timeline. Luther either forgot his vow of obedience to Rome - or decided to openly rebel against it. His one action which led to the mindset of open division rang a bell in Christianity which can never be unrung for now anyone and everyone can protest - descent - disobey.
Pastors are voted in and out - protestant churches are run by democratic mobs rather than by God's annointed. I firmly believe that Luther had no evil intent that his choices and actions would lead to the chaos which we see today - but it is a reality nonetheless.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3572f5eab8ea757e000009:/ Really?Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:41:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3572f5eab8ea757e000009
We should remember that God has never promised prosperity - much less even a comfortable life. We are called to obedience.
Job was a Godly man - who enjoyed the riches and blessings of this world, but God permitted all of that to be taken away.
And when Job asked God to explain why, his questions were answered with "Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me." We should remember that obedience is our first duty... seeking to understand the "what," the "why," and the "whens" should never affect our desire to obey.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357155ecad049f77000028:/ Really?Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:34:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f357155ecad049f77000028
Add a comment..."harmless private matter" - untrue. "Private" - especially when funded with "public" money is never private when more than one person is involved - or will be affected.
EVERYONE must agree that it requires a man and a woman to conceive a child. Even if one would attempt to argue that despite an independent heartbeat, a specific bloodtype and unique DNA that the fetus/child is not alive and a separate life while within the womb, that person is hard-pressed to convince anyone that the father should have "0" interest or influence as to the future of the child's life.
Furthermore, when we as a society relegates this as a "privaye" matter and turns a blind eye to murder, we are no better than the Poles who stood by and said "Hmmm - I wonder where all the Jews went...but that sure is a strange smell coming from those smoke stacks over there by Auschswitz."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f356eebecad04a17700000c:/ Really?Fri, 10 Feb 2012 14:24:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f356eebecad04a17700000c
@artful - I agree - Correlation always equals Cause. The USA was the first to land on the moon - so we must have been the first in space... oh wait. Well - the USA was the first on the moon - so we are the most recent in space... oh wait. You know what - it doesn't matter - I agree with your argument of blindly assuming that nearly all progress has occurred in recent world history absent from Catholic influence...never mind the pesking details or the grand canyon leaps in logic.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f356706ecad048d6700001dMaryFri, 10 Feb 2012 13:50:46 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f356706ecad048d6700001d
Henry: Do some independent research. Catholic approved birth control, or child spacing is enviromentally effective, if used properly is as effective as the pill, brings husband and wife closer together, can help women pay such close attention to their bodies that abnormalities can be detected quicker saving lives, is technologically advanced (taking advantage of computer technology, poses no threat from chemicals and hormones in the woman, and because of this will not have an adverse impact on future fertility. The Catholic Church has been right and still is right...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35652decad047b5b000077ElestethaneFri, 10 Feb 2012 13:42:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35652decad047b5b000077
Not a pregnancy test. They do a test for ovulation and an ultrasound to see if ovulation has occurred and approximately when.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35623feab8ea1c5b000030bksrusFri, 10 Feb 2012 13:30:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35623feab8ea1c5b000030
Kind of ironic that on the same page-to the right- in the "most viewed" column is an article about Kennedy and a young intern. In the 60's a woman went on tv with the same info and was booed off the stage, afterwards receiving death threats. This in the "free love" years. Compare the silence of the 60's with the $6.2-7 million taxpayer funded "detailed tell-all" Starr Commission. Perhaps society's ills say more about our "shock jock" media mentality and the dysfunction of party-first, people-last government than birth control. The pill was around in the 60's as well so I don't think the connection works.
This healthcare does not apply to churches, but to religious funded hospitals, etc. What happens to the non-Catholics who work at these facilities? Do they not deserve the same insurance as everyone else? These companies pay a %age of the healthcare, the customer pays the rest. The money for the birth control pills and all other skrips come from the insurance companies; non-religious companies.
I think the larger issue here is deflecting attention from the Republicans candidates. Keeping everyone busy with the "evil women controlling men's seed" issue stops them from considering the Church once again backing the adulterer for president -or the Mormon who 57% of Catholics don't consider to be a Christian.
Since the issue is "wasting seed", why is a thermometer and calendar less birth control than the pill? Come to think of it, isn't a vow of celibacy birth control to the extreme?
Time to let Eve Syndrome go.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f354de5eab8eaf02e00006cAnne SmithFri, 10 Feb 2012 12:03:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f354de5eab8eaf02e00006c
Hear, hear!
The rise in birth control has coincided with the rise of women in the work place, as well as a decrease over the last ten years in both teen pregnancy and teen abortions.
I am unfamiliar with any biblical passage that even talks about birth control (aside from direction against the Sin of Onan) but I am aware of a number of Old Testament rules that go entirely unheeded by modern Catholics, as well as most Protestants as well - we can eat shellfish, pork, and pizza (meat and cheese together) because modern refrigeration processes (SCIENCE!) made them safer. Hormonal birth control, condoms, and a hundred other prophylactics (ALSO SCIENCE!) have made our sex lives safer as well.
The church eventually forgave Galileo...maybe in 400 years they'll have this figured out too.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f354da4eab8eae82e00007f'CescaFri, 10 Feb 2012 12:02:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f354da4eab8eae82e00007f
Allow me to give you my story. I am a Catholic and my Husband converted to the faith before we married. We have been married for 10 years and have four sweet children. We used NFP after participating in a course before marriage but unsuccessfully so, as all our children were unexpected.
After my third child was born, both my newborn and my second child became ill with various complicated, and sometimes severe, health issues which kept us in and out of hospital for two years. It was mentally very draining for the whole family and my second child developed anxieties and phobias as a result of the treatment she had undergone. After 18 months of hospital care she was finally discharged but not before I realised I was pregnant again.
The pregnancy was very difficult and I spent 11 weeks on crutches due to pelvis problems, which eventually became so severe that I was completely bedridden for two weeks before I was eventually induced at 37 weeks. 5 weeks prior to the birth, my Husband was made redundant and on the same day his 20 year old brother died in an horrific road traffic accident.
The birth was horrendous. My son was taken to Intensive Care in respiratory distress and I found myself going into shutdown. My Husband was deeply grieving, I had three small children at home, my son was very ill and we were financially tipping over. I tried to pick myself up and keep on, but found myself sliding into a dark place. My son came home from hospital but was not well. I just could not take any more. The doctor initially diagnosed me with Postnatal Depression but I was later diagnosed with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. We found treatment for my son but he still suffers with breathing problems and is often in hospital. I am being treated for PTSD to this day.
My Husband was out of work for 5 months. We became so badly in debt that my calm, smiling, rock of a Husband had a nervous breakdown, was diagnosed with severe depression and is still on medication.
Today we have no house, no savings, no assets, no investments. We have four wonderful children whom I am homeschooling to try and get them the best start in life and ultimately, to Heaven, but there is no way, NO WAY, that either of us could have another child. I cannot even discuss the birth of my son and he will be three next month. I still have panic attacks and black moments, albeit a lot less frequent. My Husband is still trying to understand all that has happened. Sometimes, no matter how hard you pray, if your brain stops releasing serotonin, there is very little you can do about it.
We cannot financially, physically or emotionally have another child. NFP terrifies me because my cycle is not regular. My parish priest knows our circumstances in depth because I went to him for advice and told him of my Husband's decision to have a vasectomy (my Husband is 32 - this was no easy choice!). Now we are forbidden Holy Communion and I am told I am in mortal sin. So, when we pray a daily family rosary, and I am homeschooling to give them grounding to face the world and stay strong against attacks on their faith, how is it that I am doing everything I can go get them to Heaven, but I will not be going with them?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f354bdceab8ea982a000056Donna GratehouseFri, 10 Feb 2012 11:54:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f354bdceab8ea982a000056
I bet you think about what those nubile young women are doing with men who aren't you. A lot.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3541e76bb3f72650000039Chad BellangerFri, 10 Feb 2012 11:12:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3541e76bb3f72650000039
People are the ones who change. God is the same yesterday and today and forever. It is though our personal choices that we make that we sin. Their is enough medical cases and backing to be able to shut down and for of contraceptives. I am from a family of 10. We had 5 boys and 5 girls.
But as you stated it is the world that has changed. But as Catholics and Christians there is still no need to follow the Cult of Contraceptives.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3541476bb3f71550000026Donna GratehouseFri, 10 Feb 2012 11:09:43 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3541476bb3f71550000026
Blessed art those who covereth for pedophiles.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3541106bb3f75d5000003dThomas ZabiegaFri, 10 Feb 2012 11:08:48 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3541106bb3f75d5000003d
Your Rock Hudson example is a bad one, some of the pedophiles were handsome men too but they chose to abuse children rather than a beautiful woman. By the way, children that come out of homosexual homes are almost universally tarnished. And if homosexuality is genetic, then what would you say about the recent study by a Kansas State Univeristy psychologist (not even a Catholic) who found that over 30% of children who are raised by same-sex couples become homosexual, and less than 5% that come out of a home where they were raised by a mother and a father. Dr. Nicolosi, a noted psychologist who works with homosexuals said he has never met a homosexual man who has had a good relationship with his father. Homosexual men are simply looking for the love (in the good non-sexual meaning of the word) that they never obtained growing up. The same with lesbians in regards to their moms. A study in Scandinavia (one of the most tolerant places in the world for homosexuals) found that the average lifespan of a homosexual is 55 years, vs. over 75 for heterosexuals. Smoking reduces your lifespan by an average of 3 years, homosexuality by an average of 20 years, and that is countries where homosexuals are not persecuted and if you speak against homosexuals, you will go to jail (which happened to at least one Swedish Pentecostal pastor). I do not have a problem with Protestants, they are wonderful and often better Christians than many Catholics, but they are simply wrong in their theology and were founded by men (Zwingli--who beheaded his wife personally, Luther--who supported the destruction of peasant rebellions by princes in Germany, and Calvin--who established a reign of terror in Geneva) who make even the worse pope look like a saint....http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3540f669beddec7600003aDonna GratehouseFri, 10 Feb 2012 11:08:22 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3540f669beddec7600003a
Geez, is the Church teaching people to be amateur psychiatrists now or do you just watch a lot of Dr. Phil?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f353bd7eab8ea5c16000013Gina Love-FireFri, 10 Feb 2012 10:46:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f353bd7eab8ea5c16000013
Henry, where did you get that 98% figure? Did you get it from the White House website? If so, where is their data supporting that figure? How does the White House define "birth control"? Do they include NFP in this figure, a method of family planning that doesn't require health insurance? Are they including women who in their teenage years contracepted because they didn't know better and later quit in order to obey their church? Are they counting women who are menopausal who clearly don't need birth control? Are they including celibate nuns who don't need birth control? Can we please use some common sense when we throw around statistics? 98% of Catholic women using birth control is just a ridiculous figure.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35347369beddf35e000052LeaFri, 10 Feb 2012 10:14:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35347369beddf35e000052
@InStatuViatoris Please understand that I'm all for everybody using NFP. What I'm saying is that this particular argument presented is flawed.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35323869bedd9963000009hopeful momFri, 10 Feb 2012 10:05:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35323869bedd9963000009
badbob,
you start a slippery slope when you start assuming you know the fate of people who haven't even been born. while no one wants to see more crime, there have been many influential and amazing people that have overcome their upbringing. by your way of thinking it would serve that unless someone is an upstanding citizen, their life holds no value. thinking there are varying levels of value depending on what a person is like leads to more errors in thinking. maybe to serve the greater good, we should determine ahead of time in this country who is allowed to reproduce and who is not. we should have people fill out a survey of income and criminal background and if either are unacceptable we put them on the pill whether they want it or not because we'll be saving the world from all of these poor criminals. wait, maybe we should do this for anyone that is handicapped or has a learning disability as well because ultimately we will be saving their children from a lifetime of hardship...look how nice we are. oh and you know what else, we should do the same for ugly people...we'll be saving those kids a lot of heartache.
simply put, every life has value.stop thinking that you are protecting the greater good by eliminating innocent lives. there have been others in history that took that same approach and the results of their actions did anything but benefit mankind..http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3530c069bedd495c000022chlFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:59:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3530c069bedd495c000022
The pill can act as an abortifacient. It does not always prevent conception, but rather it can interfere with the implantation of the embryo, causing an abortion, often without the woman even being aware.
The Pill and NFP/FAM have the same "failure"rate, but have entirely different processes and reasoning. The book Holy Sex by Dr. Gregory Popchek is a very good reference on the Catholic Church's teachings and why NFP is different and better.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35304c6bb3f7e635000025Dante Longo IIFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:57:16 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35304c6bb3f7e635000025
The world may have "changed a lot in 2,000 years," yet people remain as they were: prone to concupiscent folly. It seems an absurd suggestion that the Church change when today's people face identical moral choices to those of our ancestors.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352ee7ecad04e07c000049Brandon FeazellFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:51:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352ee7ecad04e07c000049
Yes, Henry, the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years. But has the Word of God changed? Does God change his views on social issues as easily as man does? Just because something in society is a norm doesn't mean that it is okay and that everyone should adapt to it. There are some things in the world that should be considered sacred, no matter how many people think they are archaic. I don't claim to know how God, the Father in Heaven thinks but I doubt he believes the church's stance on birth control is archaic.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352bec69bedde753000013PeregrinoFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:38:36 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352bec69bedde753000013
Camilo, This article is written by an Excommunicated Sedevacantist splinter Catholic group. Their views do not represent the views of the Roman Catholic Church. They are schismatic, and do not recognize any Pope as valid since the before John XXIII.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352bb8ecad04bc7e00000dPhilFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:37:44 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352bb8ecad04bc7e00000d
apologize to those poeple that you have wounded and forgive those that are making keeping you angry, put them out of your life if they are bugging you that much. You're level of anger will not prodcue happiness and will estrange your children and make them angry at your, it's a perpetual cycle, like lying to yourself. You know, when we tell ourselves something is true, even when we know it's not, well, I think you get the point.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352b0d6bb3f7ca2100006fPeregrinoFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:34:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352b0d6bb3f7ca2100006f
Henry here is your problem. The Church isn't "just like any organization or company". Unlike the majority of organizations and companies its beliefs and values do not come from a board or popular input. The RCC has always taught and believed that its values and teachings are divinely inspired by God Himself. They cannot "Get with the times", because the Catholic Church views itself as existing outside of time. The Church sees itself as eternal, and believes its teachings are Truth.
You can absolutely disagree with what the Church believes and teaches, but you have no right to suggest they change their unchangeable teachings to fit popular opinion and practice. The Catholic Church is not a democracy or a public trading company.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352a9becad04c77400004cPhilFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:32:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352a9becad04c77400004c
...huh, interesting comment. Are you avoiding something here? If it's not your responsbility how can you feel guilty.....if it's not YOUR responsibility....oh, I see. You did something wrong and you know it and now your blame shifting because the truth is making you feel junky inside. Follow that and right the wrong.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3528e169bedd9b4100004ePhilFri, 10 Feb 2012 09:25:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3528e169bedd9b4100004e
are you saying that life and death should be decided based on cost? If so, I guess you'll be at the head of the extermination line when it becomes "too costly" to keep the non-productive, health care sucking, elderly, baby boomer portion of the population around. Surely you thought that out before typing, right....or did you?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3525dceab8ea9f6200006dtomz165Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:12:44 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3525dceab8ea9f6200006d
The difficulty with many of these arguments is that they in no way prove the impracticality of the Church's stand. "People don't want 13 kids these days"...this is over the top...the church's stand is not demanding that parents have 13 children but simply that artificial contraception is immoral. There are other acceptable methods to limit the number of children one has and those methods are morally acceptable, practically sound and medically safe. The argument of 13 kids is just a red herring.
The main reason my friends took contraception was so that they could engage in sex anytime anywhere with anyone and not conceive children, the family planning arguments were more respectable than saying you were a promiscuous man or woman. And what happened when or if they married, they continued taking contraception so that they could get ahead financially faster than their parent's generation did who'd spent their incomes on raising children. Many of my friends then found that they could not conceive children when they wanted them and some were never able to as you can only suppress nature for so long and it then atrophies and is unable to recover its original vigor.
As for the decline or growth of the world population, conclusions on it will have to wait for more evidence; however, several societies are facing disasters due to their own social engineering projects involving contraception, e.g., the Japanese and the Chinese and the population of Europe in the next century may flip from indigenous European to Middle Eastern and Moslem. Even our own population is aging to a point that retirement programs are probably unsustainable.
But more importantly there is a more obvious worm in all this mix than is found in these statistics alone. That is the fatal flaw of this modern society and it is that those who do not reproduce, die out. So the writing is already on the wall; the axe is already laid to the root of the tree.
If all those who practice contraception to the utmost eventually fail to reproduce and die without issue then their very numbers will decrease and the population of those who disagree with them will increase or rather replace them in the scheme of things. Thus the culture of Death is a self defeating culture; it will die out in the end not simply because anyone opposes it but simply because any culture that makes death its raison d'etre (irony intended) will die out, that is it's objective anyway and it will surely achieve it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35247b69beddf643000015tomz165Fri, 10 Feb 2012 09:06:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35247b69beddf643000015
The difficulty with these arguments is that they in no way prove the impracticality of the Church's stand. "People don't want 13 kids these days"...this is over the top...the church's stand is not demanding that parents have 13 children but simply that artificial contraception is immoral. There are other acceptable methods to limit the number of children one has and those methods are morally acceptable, practically sound and medically safe. The argument of 13 kids is just a red herring.
The main reason my friends took contraception was so that they could engage in sex anytime anywhere with anyone and not conceive children, the family planning arguments were more respectable than saying you were a promiscuous man or woman. And what happened when or if they married, they continued taking contraception so that they could get ahead financially faster than their parent's generation did who'd spent their incomes on raising children. Many of my friends then found that they could not conceive children when they wanted them and some were never able to as you can only suppress nature for so long and it then atrophies and is unable to recover its original vigor.
As for the decline or growth of the world population, conclusions on it will have to wait for more evidence; however, several societies are facing disasters due to their own social engineering projects involving contraception, e.g., the Japanese and the Chinese and the population of Europe in the next century may flip from indigenous European to Middle Eastern and Moslem. Even our own population is aging to a point that retirement programs are probably unsustainable.
But more importantly there is a more obvious worm in all this mix than is found in these statistics alone. That is the fatal flaw of this modern society and it is that those who do not reproduce, die out. So the writing is already on the wall; the axe is already laid to the root of the tree.
If all those who practice contraception to the utmost eventually fail to reproduce and die without issue then their very numbers will decrease and the population of those who disagree with them will increase or rather replace them in the scheme of things. Thus the culture of Death is a self defeating culture; it will die out in the end not simply because anyone opposes it but simply because any culture that makes death its raison d'etre (irony intended) will die out, that is it's objective anyway and it will surely achieve it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3521b26bb3f7b01d000009Joshua PerelloFri, 10 Feb 2012 08:54:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3521b26bb3f7b01d000009
Henry - This isn't a game of you score we score. This is the problem with our education system. We spout off about facts but don't come to critical conclusions about these hard issues.
You never mentioned the facts that this article states about the staggering growth in illegitimate births. We all know that a child is much more likely to grow up in poverty in a single household than with a two parent household. So this is a great detriment to our society.
The church doesn't teach you have to have 13 kids. It states you should be open to life and if the women is fertile you can exhibit self control and not engage in the marriage act. Self control is a virtue that our society does not enjoy.
Do you believe in God? As Catholics we do and God from the beginning does not change his moral laws. Now we might reject them, but God morals laws are everlasting. Gen 38 -8:10 states what God thinks of disrespecting the Marriage act.
The point about the pill is it has not helped society at all. It has made women sexual objects. Should a women be treated like this?
How about the divorce rate? My wife and I use NFP and the statistics show we have a 97% chance of staying married. What has this sex/contraceptive culture added to our society? More divorce, more abortions, more teen mothers, men that don't mature, etc, etc.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352054eab8ea9f62000003Curious catholicFri, 10 Feb 2012 08:49:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f352054eab8ea9f62000003
1. The world hasn't changed in 2k yrs. Or 5k yrs. Same intrigues, same wars, just more people killing more efficiently.
2. Catholics, or others w/out birth control, don't all have 13 children. People vary, it's the basis of evolution.
3. The real point is leaving the "G" word out of the discussion. This is incorrect: "The Church teaches that love, marriage, sex, and procreation are all things that belong together. That's it." That's NEVER "it." What is always "it," is God. Everyone has God but many don't know it. God is real. Marriage is a vocation, God is in charge and trust in Him is everything. Children are neither a "mistake" when BC fails or is forgotten, nor some burden a person is forced to bear. They are gifts of God. Those children are BY DEFINITION of inestimable value.
Of course, all humans are of inestimable value. The difference is: the Church knows this Truth and teaches it because Jesus Christ taught it. You know, God. Regardless of your beliefs about how religion is practiced, once you eschew God, life has no value.
Thus it has been through all of history. Nothing of substance changes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f351c57eab8ea224f00005cIngeFri, 10 Feb 2012 08:32:07 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f351c57eab8ea224f00005c
When the earth's population grows and develops to an American standard, there is a problem. But the problem isn't the size of the population but the way resources are being used. (See also here).
Furthermore, people start with "but if you don't use contraception you end up with 13 kids". This is completely untrue. Before contraceptives were invented there were lots of families with 4 children or less because they used a natural way of family planning. My Atheist Hippie parents are against all kinds of chemicals and wanted a natural lifestyle. Therefore my mother never used any kind of contraceptives. I only have one brother.
The REAL problem is that if you take contraceptive you pretty much can have sex as often as you want without thinking about possible consquences. People like my mother who space out children the natural way need to be constantly aware of their cycle. It takes more effort, therefore it's less popular. It's not that natural family planning is impractical and contraception is practical, it's that most people (inluding those Catholics) are LAZY when it comes to these kinds of things.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3518fb6bb3f7ae0d00003bLeaFri, 10 Feb 2012 08:17:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3518fb6bb3f7ae0d00003b
Your argument is flawed and if I could pinpoint the logical fallacy's name, I would.
It's no different than saying, "Freedom and enough money to eat whatever and how much you want is going to cause a lot of people to become obese." Years later. "See how many obese people we have? Having this kind of freedom/enough money has led to chaos."
Or even saying that there shouldn't be any tools available to unlock things--even though they are useful to those who have locked themselves out of their cars and houses--because thieves will use those tools to steal things.
You know, it was the same thinking that led to the Abolition in the 20s. "You can't deny the fact that too many people can't handle their liquor. It should never have been made/this easy to get." Of course, we can look straight to Christ on this one and see that He did drink wine, yet there is still an admonition against drunkenness.
And really, it's no different than the Marxist position against individual rights and private property. "People tend to be egotistical and the individual right to private property and capitalist policies will create and greater inequality and lead to abuses. Therefore, we should never have had these rights and the solution is for them to be removed."
Just because people, even many people, misuse something doesn't mean that in the terms of logical arguments that the thing is "bad".http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35159e69bedd9b1f000036DanFri, 10 Feb 2012 08:03:26 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f35159e69bedd9b1f000036
So the bottom line for you is that people have a "right" to sexual pleasure outside the teaching of Christ's Church just because they want to? Is it o.k. to steal things or kill people just because I want to? I'm free to do it and suffer the consequences if I want to.
People who claim to be Catholic and vote for and empower politicians to kill babies and proote family destroying gay marriage slap Jesus Christ in the face and Crown his head with thorns deriding the wisdom of God. They are truly apostates. To be Catholic means to submit to the teachings of Truth itself. It does not ask us for our approval but our obedience, for God's foolishness is far above the wisdom of men. We are eternal souls with a human body in life, our bodies are supposed to be temples of the Holy Spirit. Too many Catholics and other christians only "feel" the desires of their bodies in this world and want to please it, they are spiritually comatose, they never really knew or loved Jesus to begin with. The world may have changed a lot in 2,000 years but the struggle of sin & virtue hasn't. The Church can't be flexible with moral Truth anymore than a teacher can be flexible with mathmatics. It is what it is. Jesus asks you " Do you follow me?"http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34efce6bb3f70144000014A MitchellFri, 10 Feb 2012 05:22:06 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34efce6bb3f70144000014
The Catholic Church has always been concerned with the mandate to help the poor. They also dignify all people as beloved children of God.They are taught to treat the needy, ignorant, sick, the prisoner, the homeless as they would treat the head of the Church, Jesus Christ.
Hence the problem, The Catholic Church has schools, hospitals, charitable agencies, etc. that will be effected by this mandate.
In fact, the Church encourages people to give their lives completely in service to God and their neighbor and remain single . Does God hate marriage and children? No, the Catholic Church stands firm that marriage is a supernatural union that creates life through sacrificial, dignifying and not abusive love. The love that creates is a blessing to the couple and part of that blessing is children. She also give counsel but asks each couple to gravely consider if they can accept this blessing. I can give you many examples of families that are able to have nine children and are happy and successful, sharing their success with their communities and their children are used to sharing and are generous, frugal and modest, are indeed shining stars in a fallen world.
There are many people that just don't want to read the thirty paragraphs of Humanae Vitae, but they are just the people who should.
www.vatican.va/.../hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.htmlhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34ec3eeab8ead078000018ladottoressaFri, 10 Feb 2012 05:06:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34ec3eeab8ead078000018
Ah, that answers my previous question already. I'm not surprised.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34eb3569bedd4e34000037ladottoressaFri, 10 Feb 2012 05:02:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34eb3569bedd4e34000037
I'm just interested to know where your information comes from to back up your comment that 98% of Catholics "ignore the policy" (presumably this means "use birth control"). I doubt that 98% of the population as a whole uses birth control. I am a UK family doctor; I've no idea which of my patients are Catholics, but I'd be astonished if 98% of my female patients were using any type of birth control, even given the massive incentives we are given in the UK to provide them and persuade people to use them. That smells of an exaggerated statistic, made up for effect, rather than an epidemiological fact. Please could you quote your reference for this information?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34e6c9eab8eac664000027Robert WestFri, 10 Feb 2012 04:43:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34e6c9eab8eac664000027
The Catholic Church is 2,000 yrs old. The great empires (made up their own rules) have disappeared. The United States (mostly makes up its own rules) is on financial, moral and spiritual life support. Ill trust Jesus and His Church.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34e27aeab8ea875e000016WilliamFri, 10 Feb 2012 04:25:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34e27aeab8ea875e000016
Good article.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34d07decad04ad53000037adthmoFri, 10 Feb 2012 03:08:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34d07decad04ad53000037
actually NFP does work for women with irregular cycles. It is based on daily observations to detect your fertility NOW as opposed to depending on past cycles or standard patterns. <a href="http://www.creightonmodel.com/background.htm" target="_blank">http://www.creightonmodel.com/background.htm</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34cb546bb3f7937e00001bJayMeisterFri, 10 Feb 2012 02:46:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34cb546bb3f7937e00001b
Well argued, Mr. Blodget.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34b88969beddd95b000011ChicagoRay44Fri, 10 Feb 2012 01:26:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34b88969beddd95b000011
"Men are now considered to be fulfilling their duties merely by paying court-ordered child-support. That's a pretty dramatic lowering of standards for "fatherhood."
In fact that low, pathetic standard isn't even met by the wealthiest and most well known citizens of the black community who blow through some 100's of millions in their 'prime', (which has literally collapsed under liberal city rule across the US since the 60s' and the rise of race baiting for profit) which by the way is 75% fatherless and while 30% of the population account for 70% of the violent crime and incarcerations.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34b6fb69bedde84800002bChristopher NelsonFri, 10 Feb 2012 01:19:39 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34b6fb69bedde84800002b
People don't need to have thirteen kids... that is not what the Catholic Church teaches, and actually there are plenty of ways to try and avoid pregnancy by using natural means. For instance, married couples could choose to only have sex while the woman is in her infertile state, which with some practice is rather easy to discern.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34ada069bedd4c3a000029JRAFri, 10 Feb 2012 00:39:44 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34ada069bedd4c3a000029
Married 12 years. Two kids. Pretty sure (but not 100% sure) that we won't have more. No contraceptives at any point. Yeah, some weeks we don't have sex.
This whole issue, and the hysteria around universal access to affordable birth control, is about nothing more than that: some weeks we don't have sex. You're right that the world has changed in 2000 years. But this latest ideology--that sex is some uncontrollable compulsion that might overtake you at any moment like a hiccup--is as bizarre as anything that's come before.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34ac81ecad04b01b000022KathrynFri, 10 Feb 2012 00:34:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34ac81ecad04b01b000022
Well, apparently this is the only case in which I'm part of the 1% (or 2% as the case may be). My husband and I have used NFP exclusively since our marriage almost 9 years ago. We have only 3 children (in only 4 pregnancies) and used NFP to avoid pregnancy for 3 years after our marriage. So to those who say NFP doesn't work, or that it means you'll never have sex, think again. It works wonderfully when used correctly, although yes, this means periods of abstinence. It means exercising self-control as well. I really enjoyed the article - surprised to find it outside of the normal religious news services but it is a very welcome witness to the beauty of the Church's teaching on marriage and sexuality.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34a701eab8ea0e7900000aRick FalettoFri, 10 Feb 2012 00:11:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34a701eab8ea0e7900000a
You are correct that population growth falls as countries get richer, however, birth control is one of the major factors in this population drop.
Besides that, your comment is simply confusing. Use the return key when you start a completely new idea with "'People don't want 13 kids'". In response to that, their survival doesn't depend on it: work is being done in India to teach people how to avoid falling into the trap of having as many male children as possible to sustain themselves while still living reasonably well.
Your last line makes no sense to me, unless you're saying that the peripheral world will get richer and its population will drop. I agree with Henry Blodget: The peripheral world will continue to grow at an astounding rate, one that will surpass that of the core world and cause extreme population growth, probably past 9 million without stopping, especially if contraception were somehow universally banned.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34a5f7eab8ea1b6c000041Rick FalettoFri, 10 Feb 2012 00:07:03 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34a5f7eab8ea1b6c000041
It is ridiculous to say that "there's something called natural family planning". The fact of the matter is that right now, a massive majority of catholics will not use contraception or show that restraint. Whether your belief is right or not, you should not state that the church is right simply because we wouldn't need contraception if billions of people acted differently.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34a0f2ecad048809000014AmandaThu, 09 Feb 2012 23:45:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34a0f2ecad048809000014
True, there was an abuse in the selling of indulgences. Some priests then, as some are now, were corrupt. But to say that an indulgence is a way to buy your way into heaven is a typical non-Catholic slip-up to make. Catholics believe that the instant you truly repent, the INSTANT you are truly sorry for your sins, you are forgiven by God. The next step is Confession, which deals with the temporal consequences of your sin, only. If you steal a car, and are truly sorry, sure, God forgives you. But that doesn't mean you don't have to give the car back. But say you sleep with someone else's wife? You can't exactly just "give that back," so the temporal consequence still remains. Because God is a just God, though you are forgiven, payment must be made (Luke 12:59). That's where a penance at the end of Confession or an Indulgence comes in. A person does not "buy their way into heaven." An Indulgence in its proper use, unlike the abuse Luther witnessed, is a temporal act for temporal consequences, that very often includes receiving the Sacraments of Penance and Communion, prayer, and/or completing a pilgrimage of some sort. I will admit that monetary penances and requests for charitable donations do still occur--though I've never received one that was unjust. For example, I once heard a man say he confessed to have spent money on something he really should not have...his penance was to donate the exact amount of money he had spent to charity.
So the Church has taught since the Founding, and so She will continue to teach. I think staying firmly rooted in our reasoning IS something to praise. It means that, as a Catholic, I won't try to answer your accusations about our historical past of evil acts committed by fallen men by pointing fingers at worse sins also done in the name of Christianity by other denominations. It does mean, though, that our roots help us stand firm, no matter our past, present, or future. It means that, just because 1.7% of the Catholic clergy may royally screw up, the other 98.3% still have their Church and Her teachings to keep them going for another 2000+ years.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3499dceab8eaa35c000017EddieThu, 09 Feb 2012 23:15:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3499dceab8eaa35c000017
The Church is not in the business of changing relative to whatever the (perhaps vast) majority of people happen to think is true. They are in the business of finding absolute truths (which by their nature as absolute truths, haven't changed in 2,000 years). The Catholic Church's stance as the author so eloquently put is that, in an absolutely true sort of way love, sex, procreation, and marriage are all intrinsically connected, and lo and behold, we now have evidence to support that. The Church has been built on not changing with the times. Why should it start now?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3497d5ecad04ef75000031JulesThu, 09 Feb 2012 23:06:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3497d5ecad04ef75000031
@Historical Awareness: Yes, we should review history of the papacy and find that of the 9 corrupt Popes - not a single one created, destroyed, and altered Church Doctrine - the Holy Spirit protects His Church from man.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f349472eab8eadb51000021joniThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:52:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f349472eab8eadb51000021
As soon as Jesus reverses His mind on abortion and contraception, the Church will too. It's nice of you to offer the Church advice. Many churches have taken your advice and have updated their theology to keep up with the times. The Catholic Church is going to stick with the teachings of the Lord and take her chances with upsetting the enlightened folks such as yourself.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348e5f6bb3f77416000041Terry AustenThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:26:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348e5f6bb3f77416000041
Look into the Creighton method. Works regardless of cycles.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348cfe69bedd0305000014Terry AustenThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:20:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348cfe69bedd0305000014
Ever heard of NFP? Not using contraception doesn't necessarily equate to many children. It's funny that you mention 98%. It just so happens that 98% of married couples that use NFP DON'T get a divorce. It's a pretty simple concept really. By using contraception, you are breaking your wedding vows every time you have sex. I can imagine that repeatedly breaking your wedding vows would eventually lead to strain on a marriage. NFP has been shown to be more effective at postponing pregnancy than any combination of contraceptives has been shown to prevent pregnancy. People who think that no contraception = 13 kids are the ones living in the stone ages.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348cec6bb3f7551c00000bWeronika JańczukThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:20:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348cec6bb3f7551c00000b
My friend, there are two things about which you are fundamentally wrong:
1. Overpopulation is a myth.
Source: <a href="http://overpopulationisamyth.com/" target="_blank">http://overpopulationisamyth.com/</a>.
2. The Church doesn't disallow individuals from avoiding pregnancy. The specific lies in the use of contraception, for the reasons listed in the article. Rather than use contraception, the Church promotes natural family planning, which asks the couple to abstain from sexual activity for the course of a few days during which the woman is at risk for getting pregnant (really, women are 100% fertile for a very short span of time). Studies show that couples who engage in NFP have longer, stronger marriages, in addition to having the ability to plan their families if finances are tight, etc.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348c37ecad040368000017RyanThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:17:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348c37ecad040368000017
I'm copying this from a comment I just made when someone posted this article on facebook, and several of his friends started debating it.
Okay, the population spike in recent history really doesn't have a lot to with the invention of contraception and the sexual revolution. It has to do with great inventions and innovations in the world starting with the industrial revolution. Medicine has extended peoples life span from 35 years to 80, and created a vastly higher quality of life for everyone. Overpopulation is really something to worry about, and citing Russia or China doesn’t really debunk it as an issue. Large swaths of Asia have implanted their own form of birth control by eliminating females in favor of males. This will have detrimental effects in the years ahead on those countries as well as other repercussions, but it by no means justifies overpopulation. Many developed countries have low birth rates because the higher the average socioeconomic level is, the lower the birthrate is. Germany recently corrected this by opening their borders and allowing more people to immigrate there from third-world nations. Russia in itself is a peculiar case, and there’s no one single thing to point to for their low birth rate.
As for the “every time contraception is used, a possible genius is lost” argument, I’ll start by ignoring the fallacy of this statement, and then say that one has to evaluate something like this on a bell-curve. The life lost must be assumed to be an average life, because there is just as much chance of producing a genius as a criminal, if not more. Looking at it from this perspective, you’re just stopping the creation of another average person.
Now we’re back at overpopulation.
There is nothing wrong with people not believing in contraception, and I can see the argument that this article is attempting to make. However, Catholicism is extremely popular in Latin and South America, which is home to some of the poorest countries on earth. These areas tend to suffer from overpopulation, and inadequate infrastructure—hence the burning of the rainforest. With poverty often comes extreme proselytization, as these people have nothing to cling to but religion itself. These people are the ones hurt by the Catholic Church’s stance on contraception. These families do not need unwanted children, who often times do not even make to adulthood. These children are incredible burdens on these people, yet they refuse to use birth control due to how devout they are. The children only propagate this cycle of poverty, because they drag the whole family down, as well being most likely to never achieve a socioeconomic level any higher than that of the parents. Not to mention mothers who die in child birth due to lack of medical care.
Finally, the article deals with “lowering of moral standards”. That phrase means nothing. Moral standards are solely in the eye of the beholder, and it has become a quasi-pejorative term used to rally people against things. Also brushed over is the article’s misogynistic stance:
“And if you don't think women are being reduced to objects to satisfy men, welcome to the internet, how long have you been here?”
This is essentially saying women are not capable of using their own free will, and that they are somehow lower than men for letting men take advantage of them. Why is it not the men who are becoming objects to satisfy women?
TL;DR:
The article is misogynistic, the Catholic Church’s stance on contraception is terrible, overpopulation is a problem, underpopulation is not outside of isolated situations.
Apologies for the wall of text, to quote Pascal:
"I am sorry to have wearied you with so long a letter but I did not have time to write you a short one"http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348c28eab8ea9b4000001eMarla StevensonThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:16:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348c28eab8ea9b4000001e
AMEN SISTER! See my comments below.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348afceab8eaf044000008Marla StevensonThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:11:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f348afceab8eaf044000008
NFP has been wonderful for me and my fiance! As a woman and practicing Catholic with very irregular cycles, NFP and the Creighton Model have been a blessing! It has given my fiance and I chance to learn SOOO much about my body that I may have never found out if I didn't practice it and just went on the pill. Who knows - if I were to go on the pill I might never have a chance at conceiving when we decide to. By practicing the Creighton Model, using my personal observations, and scientific based information I am on a much better track to having a happy, healthy, marriage, "sex life", and overall healthy body. Check it out at: <a href="http://www.creightonmodel.com/" target="_blank">http://www.creightonmodel.com/</a> Bonus!: It is budget friendly and doesn't have a negative impact on our already struggling healthcare system!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3488afeab8ea604000001aHistorical AwarenessThu, 09 Feb 2012 22:02:07 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3488afeab8ea604000001a
Are you referring to the same capitalist spirit that prompted the selling of indulgences, the selling of the seat of the Pope, etc. And as long as we're bringing up the notion of the decline of moral standards, I think it is important to review the history of the papacy including Popes John XII and Benedict IX. As the goal should be to present truth, it's important that the church face its own dirty laundry.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3485fe69bedd296e000030Marla StevensonThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:50:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3485fe69bedd296e000030
I have to strongly disagree with the statement, "The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company."
Remember that the Catholic Church is not like any other organization or company. The Church does not report to or follow orders of a CEO. The Church does not make decisions around social policies and agendas just because customers (parish members, other Christian churches, the media, politicians, etc.) thinks they need to get with the times or feels their needs and wants aren't being met by the beliefs and teachings of The Church.
Pro-choice or not, you can dig up and provide the public with as much data, numbers, and statistics as you want. It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter how many children have died from abortions or how many lives have been prevented by married and unmarried couples using contraception. It’s not about how many marriages have fallen apart, how many people are unfaithful to their partner, how many children have been born to unwed mothers. It’s not about how many people there will or will not be in the year 2050, or that Kim Kardashian's wedding lasted 72 days. It doesn’t even matter how many Catholics don’t believe or practice in the Church’s teachings. Even though on a personal level, (and I believe on a societal level), these numbers and statistics are disappointing and sad, they don’t matter when it comes to changing the Church’s stance.
The Catholic Church ultimately practices, teaches, shares, and exemplifies a higher power than any person or thing on earth. The Church does not bow down and answer to the complaints, whining, or conveniences of followers or non-followers. The Catholic Church answers to GOD.
God does not care about getting with the times or what will make our lives more convenient, comfortable, or easy. Flexibility and changing circumstances do not drive his decisions, words, teachings, or expectations on how we are to live our lives. God and the Church do care about us becoming better people and living a life that pleases and exemplifies HIM.
I would highly recommend doubters of the Church, practicing Catholics, “cradle” Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Muslims, rich, poor, blacks, white, married, singles, those in a “it’s complicated” relationship, straight, and homosexuals, to study and live Pope Paul’s Humanae Vitae. Once you know and understand this, I promise you, you will see the Church, life, love, marriage, sex, procreation, the world, God and His son in a different light.
The book “Theology of the Body for Beginners” by Christopher West is a great place to start. It definitely helped answer my questions and dissolve misconceptions about the Church and its teachings. It will shed a new light on what the Church really is and what it stands for.
When you need help understanding something, want to talk, or want to know what steps to take next in changing your life, let me know. God, the Catholic Church, and I will be there for you…. Even if it is uncomfortable, inconvenient, or people say we shouldn’t.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34855b69bedd3d6e000019KateThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:47:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34855b69bedd3d6e000019
I felt it necessary to comment on this...The Catholic Church does NOT expect people to have 13 children. The Church expects married couples to be responsible with their family planning. Couples must discern each month if they are in a position (emotionally, spiritually, financially, etc..) to welcome a new life into our world. That is to say they they are supposed to practice Natural Family Planning...yes, that means abstinence on occasion during the fertile portion of a woman's cycle. Yes..this is very difficult to do...YES, IT WORKS, and yes, my husband and I do it. I know many people, ok, most people, want to have sex whenever, however, with whomever....but that is not what our Faith teaches. People will disagree, and that is fine, but they should not dare try to force our faith into something that we are adamantly opposed to. This is what we believe is part of salvation, and the government has no right to make us do something we believe is wrong.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3484bf69bedd5475000013Lois KobbThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:45:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3484bf69bedd5475000013
I have met people who seem to make enemies everywhere they go, who have few friends, who never get along with anyone they meet, and cannot seem to understand why. Of course, it is never their fault, it is always the fault of those other people who don't like them.
But there is a reason why these people are not liked: it is because they are fundamentally unlikeable, due to their behavior, attitudes, and outlook on life. I avoid people like this because I know there is no good to be obtained by being around them. If I knew of an entire organization made up of such people--those who "don't get along with the world," as you put it--the last thing I would want to do is join it.
Perhaps you should think of some better reasons why you are a Catholic, because not being liked by anyone seems like a really bad reason.
Also, what does the age of your church have to do with anything? Hinduism is MUCH older than Christianity, so by your reasoning it is the better religion. If Christianity is so great, then why has it not always existed? Why did God not send Jesus 6000 years ago--or 10,000 or 30,000--instead of only 2000? Other religions existed long before Christianity came along, and others will exist long after Christianity has been abandoned and forgotten. You are newcomers on the stage of life, doomed to eventual obscurity like everything else; nothing really special at all.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3484a6ecad04055800002aAn unbiased observerThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:44:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3484a6ecad04055800002a
While not of the Catholic faith, I respect the views of the church without subscribing to them. Specifically, as the article refers to the Humanae Vitae, remember that women for a majority of history have been nothing more than the "objects of men" used as men pleased as is written in scripture. How many concubines did Solomon have? This is not the current culture, but culture has changed over the last 2000-4000 years. Secondly, Pope Paul VI writes that the government will have a role of coercion in reproductive matters. Long before 1968 the government was involved in limiting the numbers of individuals capable of bearing children. From the 1700's through to the mid-1900's, the government placed individuals accused of being "insane" or "displeasing to the eyes" (aka ugly or disfigured) in asylums where they were "sanitized" to prevent the passing along of inferior genetics. We are not talking about Nazi Germany, we are talking about the United States of America. These issues already existed prior to the sexual revolution or the Humanae Vitae. These are issues of which we must be aware prior to making great statements about the vision and power of the Humanae Vitae. That being said, natural or unnatural family planning only works with discipline (hence the high rate of unplanned pregnancy with the use of contraceptions). The reality is that there is a lot of misinformation being circulated on both sides and it limits the clarity of the possible choices and outcomes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34845ceab8ead937000017Mother of 2Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:43:40 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34845ceab8ead937000017
Add a comment...@ soy catholica : Not true. There is a method of NFP called the Creighton Model which works with ANY possible cycle you can dream up. Do your research.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3483fdecad04e55d000003ajkorvThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:42:05 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3483fdecad04e55d000003
>>People don't want 13 kids these days. They can't afford 13 kids these days.
This might be true if you believed that Natural Family Planning equaled no preventative measures. However, if you actually did your research intelligently (as in, actually looking at the process of NFP), you'd find that it uses knowledge of fertility cycles to determine when fertility happens in the woman's cycle (which will differ per every woman, it does not necessarily use the 'rhythm' method, which was based on knowledge in the '30s & '50s) and making the intellectual choice of being proactive and avoiding sex during this time or engaging in it, dependent on what your desire is. And, unsurprisingly as it's based on science, it has a 99% success rate for those who practice it correctly & consistently. Oddly enough, it works for those who use it. My guess is that you don't know anyone who uses it correctly & consistently and you haven't looked into what it actually is. And most people refuse to own up to being proactive in their lives.
Thanks for the great article!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3481b669bedde65f00003eLois KobbThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:32:22 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3481b669bedde65f00003e
Are you not aware that as many as 40% of all pregnancies end in miscarriage? These natural abortions can occur at any time during the pregnancy, and often happen at such an early date that the woman does not even realize she was pregnant. (Implanted embryos leave scars on the uterus, which doctors can detect if they happen to examine the woman's womb for any reason.) If God loves unborn babies so much--apparently even more than babies who are already born, and definitely more than adults--then why does he allow so many of them to die through miscarriage? Jesus loves the little children...except for the ones still in the womb, apparently.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347f6d6bb3f7ab7a00002dLois KobbThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:22:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347f6d6bb3f7ab7a00002d
Contraceptions don't cause abortions. I think you are confused about this. Also, you seem to think that people who DON'T use contraceptives are less likely to have sex whenever they want, with whomever they want. Reality disagrees with you.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347e76ecad04d649000029chlThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:18:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347e76ecad04d649000029
You're a guy aren't you? As a woman, I can attest to how the pill is thrust upon us. Go to an OBGYN, even a pro-life one like I do, with any sort of issue and see what the response is. The grand cover up of all symptoms, of any complaint... the pill. And then guess what? 5, 10 15 years later, women go off of it to try to have a baby and the same problems are still there because they were never dealt with.
Women are told they need the pill like they need food. In order to get anywhere in life, you have to take it, or be in favor of it.
The pill is literally making women sick because they are putting chemicals into their bodies to stop a perfectly healthy system of their body from functioning.
Then we are told, that taking the pill is what responsibility is. That infertility is being responsible, having more than 2 kids (or 2 kids too close in age to each other) is reckless and burdensome on society. AND you better be sure to get right back to work if you want to have any value to the rest of the world.
I see the Pill as enslavement. There is no knowing your body with the pill. There is only the illusion of freedom. WHO benefits from the pill, but men who want no excuses for saying no to sex, and doctors who don't want to do the research into any nuanced OB issue.
Yes, pre marital sex has always existed as well as children out of wedlock, but there has been an explosion since the 60s and it has not been to our country's benefit- we are headed toward an entitlement state and the way out is to show people their dignity, power, self worth and capability through true education. I for one think we need to tell women that they owe no debt to the Pill.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347e46eab8ea2d22000046Lois KobbThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:17:42 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347e46eab8ea2d22000046
The Christians who support the notion of "multiply and fill the earth" do not care about any of that. It does not matter if children go hungry, if parents can't support them, if the family must be on Welfare, or anything. All that matters is that one verse in Genesis, written at a time when nobody could imagine what a million people looked like, let alone 7 billion. If that really was God's command to humans, then he is as stupid and short-sighted as the people who worship him.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347d536bb3f7b67e000003NoThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:13:39 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347d536bb3f7b67e000003
It is not a matter of the policy being outdated... it was never valid to begin with. Blaming contraceptives for humanities problems is like yelling at a hammer for not putting the nail in the right place.
For some reason the Catholic Church's message and God's message never did align that well, The Church preaches fear and condemnation, yearning for the relevance of its shepherding structure. The message of Christ is hope and salvation on a very personal level.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347cb369beddea5f00001aEBurrellYMThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:10:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347cb369beddea5f00001a
I disagree with you on the last two sentences. What I love about the Church is that it doesn't change with the circumstances on the issues that are most important, and foundational to our faith. That's why we call it the Truth and share it. Changing the Truth that has been handed down for over 2000 years now would not be the Truth. It would then simply be an opinion. The Church stands firm on the issues we know are ethical and moral, falling in line with what Jesus Christ taught. I am grateful that at least one "organization" is maintaining integrity amidst a fallen world full of people shifting and compromising morals for the sake of what is popular and what has become acceptable, and still wrong, behavior. I appreciate your honesty, just don't agree with you.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347a96eab8ea062200002dAndrewRThu, 09 Feb 2012 21:01:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f347a96eab8ea062200002d
@Donna Gratehouse: you clearly don't understand the fundamentals of the Catholic faith, much less what being a christian is about, I suggest that you take the time to fully review the religion that you are referring to before you make such egregious statements. People aren't Catholic because they have no will-power, and its very rare that you'll find a genuine, practicing catholic who is nothing but joyful..Only once you become familiar with God's love, will you understand the "arbitrary" lifestyle that many lead..http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3478dcecad04d63d000026Tom DionThu, 09 Feb 2012 20:54:36 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3478dcecad04d63d000026
The Church's teaching on contraceptives is based upon reasoning. That reasoning leads to its belief that contraceptives are immoral, not simply in its own eyes, but in the eyes of God. Because of that, it can't "be flexible and change with the circumstances". God doesn't simply "change with the circumstances". There is truth Henry and there is deception. The truth is that contraceptives are destructive to human nature (witness all of the various examples in this article). Deception is that contraceptives somehow make us more free and in control of ourselves. The Church's teaching on this will never change because it is truth.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3477d669bedd355d000003chlThu, 09 Feb 2012 20:50:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3477d669bedd355d000003
The Catholic Church does not tell people how many children they have to have, they say it is a matter between couples and God. NFP forces a couple to seriously consider each month whether they should attempt to have another child. Life and Death are the most serious of issues. The Church teaches you are creating an immortal soul when you conceive a baby. It is one of the most powerful things we can do as humans and as such requires a great deal of thought and prayer. The Church is not telling people to have 13 kids they cannot care for. Many Catholics find however, that after opening themselves up to life and all the joy it offers that they WANT to have as many blessings as they can. NFP when done according to its scientific principles, is as effective as birth control, but very different in it's requirements of those who use it. It is meant to be used in a committed and loving relationship (marriage) where both people are meant to actively participate or abstain together. It requires regular serious conversation between the couple, a commitment to the discipline of knowing a woman's specific cycle, patience, self control, generosity and above all a relationship with God. You are supposed to bring Him into your most intimate of acts so that it can be a sacred act, an act done in participation with the Creator of the Universe. If you are looking for a contemporary book on this subject, read Gregory Popchek's book Holy Sex.
This issue is best seen in the positive teachings of the Church, as opposed to the "don't do that because it's bad" way of thinking. The Church says "no" because what it teaches is infinitely better. It gives the act of sex a dignity that should be sought by children of God.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34759ceab8eae51f000003NFPworksThu, 09 Feb 2012 20:40:44 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34759ceab8eae51f000003
While this article is not exhaustive (nor is it meant to be), it's hard to argue with the social science, only some of which is quoted here.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3474076bb3f79d6200003aJust another Catholic geekThu, 09 Feb 2012 20:33:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3474076bb3f79d6200003a
@Is DMG short for DeMaGogue? Well as a matter of fact, the term "Big Bang" was first used by Dr. Georges Lemaître who was a contemporary of Einstein and a Jesuit Priest. In addition, Dr. Robert Spitzer who was the head of Gonzaga U's Physics Dept is also a priest.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34722269bedd924c000015jf1Thu, 09 Feb 2012 20:25:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34722269bedd924c000015
I would like to bring to your attention a rape which causes a pregnancy is very rare. It should not even be mentioned in such a debate. However, now that it has been brought up, i would like to add the following. Please examine your conscionse as to whether or not a feotus is life and if it is, there should no justifiable reason (including rape) for ending that life. A mother with a 1 year old should have just as much right to murder her baby as a pregnant mother. If the feotus is life, and it is a unique specimine with chromosones and unique set of DNA, (which every feotus does have) it's life. Just like you and I sitting here now, typing on our computers. x amount of years ago, we were that little feotus. I am debating, praying and striving to save you. Where you are debating and striving for my mother to end my life at her own direptancy. . . . . (P.S - Funny how everyone that is pro-abortion is alive)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346f156bb3f79d6200001bEllen CabreraThu, 09 Feb 2012 20:12:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346f156bb3f79d6200001b
@like-mind. re: "The Pill allowed the Other Half...to join the merriment." How's that working out for us women? Have you seen the stats on increased STDs? This "fun" has resulted in the need to develop vaccines for our 9-13 year old daughters against HPV. Women in their 30s who finally want children have trouble conceiving because of scarring from previous abortions or have high risk pregnancies as a result of the STDs picked up in their youth. Thanks, but no thanks. Granted, pre-Pill women did not have career choices, could not have their own private bank accounts, could not rent their own apartments, which is why they slept with any prospect in hopes to secure a future. Let's give credit to the women's rights movement in those areas for the freedom we now enjoy. I don't see the freedom of carefree sex having helped us much physically or emotionally.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346e7a69beddf83800005esuebThu, 09 Feb 2012 20:10:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346e7a69beddf83800005e
Interesting point of view. The only issue is that the Church deals with man (as in humankind). It's not against progress at all. What the Church knows is man. As much as we have progressed we still have war, hunger, poverty, etc. What once was done with horses and spears is now done with nuclear weapons...but it is the greed of man that still drives him to war, to let the hungry starve, to provide an overabundance for himself and not give to where he is only living with what he needs. I think in 2,000 years there are aspects where we are more civilized but each one of us still struggles with our own passions. The Catholic Church has 2,000 years of experience with the human heart...I wouldn't blow them off so easy.
On a very different note:
Also, Natural Family Planning is a great means to avoid or to have a pregnancy. I think every woman should do it. They insist on shopping at whole foods but are on birth control? What? That is the most inorganic thing you can do to your body!! Every woman should take the time to learn her cycle and behave according to it. It's simple, natural and tells you more about your personal health.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3462bcecad04bf25000012Paul L.Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:20:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3462bcecad04bf25000012
Yawn.......you're clueless friend.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346140eab8ea7f79000002Paul L.Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:13:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346140eab8ea7f79000002
Dear Henry,
You're thinking like an animal, not a human being. Unfortunately most people think like animals these days and THAT'S what's changed MOST in the past 2000 years. The Church always thinks as 'God thinks' so to speak, as Christ rebuked Peter for thinking like 'men'. We can and should think like God, (not as well but within the same 'sphere'), and we need to, or expect to die like bugs, stomping all over each other. The Catholic Church is the oldest and largest, most enduring and successful institution in the history of the Universe because She thinks like God, not like 'carnal men'. Now Obama thinks like 'men', when he thinks at all.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3460e86bb3f7964600002fPhillip RiveraThu, 09 Feb 2012 19:12:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3460e86bb3f7964600002f
Their have been many articles published and many comments made for and against the HHS Mandate and many of them include in some capacity something about the Catholic Church. People speak of a changing world, and given the world is a changing and dynamic place. But because of these changes do we always have to adapt to what the world wants? Since unemployment is at such a high rate and for some finding a job to support a family and themselves seems almost hopeless do we stop looking for a job? Just because we have Smartphone’s that make it accessible to the internet and social medias is it okay to be sitting at the dinner table on your phone the whole time? Is missing their child's games or extracurricular activities because they have to work a good enough reason to make a child or a parent feel any better? Their are many facts out their and some may be accurate and some may be incorrect but if you look at the HHS mandate whether you agree with it or not what change can the world make next? What if they mandated schools to start making contraceptives available to people in high school and middle school because they were sexually active? What if you were only allowed to cover a child or a spouse on your medical insurance because it was deemed too expensive to cover more than one person? Let’s face it the world is a “what if…,” place because people at times do not want to be caught settling for anything less than the best, do not want to be persecuted, or do not have patience or the knowledge to make an informed decision. The HHS Mandate is a decisions made by government to fix what they deem a problem for the present moment. The Catholic Church can see the HHS Mandate as a government decision that will create problems not only in present but also in the future. Regardless of your stance on the HHS Mandate or in anything please consider this when making a decision…“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.” This is from the New International Version of the Bible and can be found in the book of John chapter 15 verse 1-2 (John 15:1-2). Now change the “me,” to “my family, or my America, or my government.” As daunting as the present may seem, bring your hope for tomorrow with you. So that one day you may pass that hope on to anyone who may dare to do the same.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346050ecad04c01500003ePhillip RiveraThu, 09 Feb 2012 19:09:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f346050ecad04c01500003e
Their have been many articles published and many comments made for and against the HHS Mandate and many of them include in some capacity something about the Catholic Church. People speak of a changing world, and given the world is a changing and dynamic place. But because of these changes do we always have to adapt to what the world wants? Since unemployment is at such a high rate and for some finding a job to support a family and themselves seems almost hopeless do we stop looking for a job? Just because we have Smartphone’s that make it accessible to the internet and social medias is it okay to be sitting at the dinner table on your phone the whole time? Is missing their child's games or extracurricular activities because they have to work a good enough reason to make a child or a parent feel any better? Their are many facts out their and some may be accurate and some may be incorrect but if you look at the HHS mandate whether you agree with it or not what change can the world make next? What if they mandated schools to start making contraceptives available to people in high school and middle school because they were sexually active? What if you were only allowed to cover a child or a spouse on your medical insurance because it was deemed too expensive to cover more than one person? Let’s face it the world is a “what if…,” place because people at times do not want to be caught settling for anything less than the best, do not want to be persecuted, or do not have patience or the knowledge to make an informed decision. The HHS Mandate is a decisions made by government to fix what they deem a problem for the present moment. The Catholic Church can see the HHS Mandate as a government decision that will create problems not only in present but also in the future. Regardless of your stance on the HHS Mandate or in anything please consider this when making a decision…“I am the true vine, and my Father is the gardener. 2 He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.” This is from the New International Version of the Bible and can be found in the book of John chapter 15 verse 1-2 (John 15:1-2). Now change the “me,” to “my family, or my America, or my government.” As daunting as the present may seem, bring your hope for tomorrow with you. So that one day you may pass that hope on to anyone who may dare to do the same.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345fa3ecad04b815000036LindseyThu, 09 Feb 2012 19:06:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345fa3ecad04b815000036
"If is wrong why is natural right?"
Because we were designed that way. God made us have a cycle that we could, indeed, learn about, understand, and work with. He does not expect us to have as many children as physically possible. The Church has tons of writings on this topic, very complex and deep. You could start with Humane Vitae. The Catholic Church is not bonkers.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345e97ecad04bc1500002eLindseyThu, 09 Feb 2012 19:02:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345e97ecad04bc1500002e
"But more importantly, the policy is just completely impractical. People don't want 13 kids these days. They can't afford 13 kids these days. And that's why 98% of Catholics ignore the policy."
Eschewing artificial birth control will not cause each family to have a guaranteed 13 children. We've never once in our marriage of a dozen years used artificial birth control, and we've managed to space our children at two and three years apart, and our youngest is now 3.5 (we have 4 children, none unplanned). We've successfully used Natural Family Planning the whole time (specifically, the Sympto-Thermal Method, which is pretty darn scientific, educates a woman about her body, and is FREE). I'm not going to say "NFP is easy, everyone can do it with NO PROBLEMS" because I know there are inherent challenges, and some that will be more dramatic for certain couples. But, really, I just couldn't let the idea go by without comment, that all Catholics would be doomed to huge families if they did not use artificial or chemical birth control.
Secondly, I'd check that 98% stat. I've read all over the place that it is a number which refers to Catholic women who have at some point used birth control. I would fall into that "yes" category, only because a dermatologist insisted that I go on it "in case of rape" when I took Accutane when I was 18 years old. But in reality, I'm a Catholic (convert, who was introduced to the Catholic Church via NFP) who has never used birth control for birth control. I do not believe 98% of Catholics ignore the teachings of the Church (although I will concede, many do).http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345ca76bb3f7aa40000024Mister HThu, 09 Feb 2012 18:54:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345ca76bb3f7aa40000024
The Church absolutely has bee right on the issue of birth control.
For those who wish to further explore this issue, an excellent commentary and further resource links can be found here:
<a href="http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2011/07/43rd-anniversary-of-humanae-vitae.html" target="_blank">http://allhands-ondeck.blogspot.com/2011/07/43rd-anniversary-of-humanae-vitae.html</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345a17ecad04bc1500000fSaraThu, 09 Feb 2012 18:43:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f345a17ecad04bc1500000f
umm... I'm sorry, but bigger items being what the priest scandals? I don't know if you realize it but the rest of society has a much higher rate of that than the Catholic church- it doesn't mean that it isn't ridiculously evil that it happened and was covered up by many adults... but regardless, the church isn't the only place where that is a problem. Besides that, don't you think helping the people of the church follow the teachings and understand it's teachings are not a continuing thing of importance... so throw out our faith because some nasty men committed some crimes who claimed to have the same faith as the rest of the Catholic world? The teachings on contraception aren't ridiculous and if you don't agree- don't be Catholic. But whatever faith you have (or don't have) I hope our country defends your right to practice it.
SO, also something that you might not realize, the pill, the morning after pill, IUD's, hormonal implants and shots, all have the mechanism of causing a fertilized embryo to die. That makes all of those things abortifacient. They cause the lining of the uterus not to be healthy for implantation and therefore no place for baby to implant. Many do actually prevent ovulation or fertilization, but it's isn't known how often fertilization is prevented or implantation is prevented. If you have a child already- (a fertilized embryo) killing it just isn't and shouldn't be an option- not to mention something the church (who firmly believes that life begins at conception and murder is evil) should ever be forced to pay for.
And yes, all the things humanae vitae have said would happen- are happening. I don't consider them good things and should be a sign that maybe contraception wasn't the best idea after all. Do we not learn from our mistakes or do we just want to continue this ridiculous cycle we are in? I guess we are going to continue this ridiculous cycle but don't force people who know it's ridiculous to pay for it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3459c96bb3f7a142000009Catholic EmployeeThu, 09 Feb 2012 18:42:01 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3459c96bb3f7a142000009
The Supreme Court just upheld church's rights when it comes to hiring, etc., even if it would violate federal law in another environment. So basically, yes, this mandate is trying to make the church violate its own teachings and dogma, in violation of the first amendment. Let's face it, those of us who work for the Catholic Church know this isn't going to be a part of our benefits packages and no one is forcing us to work for the Church! If these benefits are so important to these people, let them follow their own convictions and work someplace else! The government has no right to mandate this, and it's a dangerous precedent to set.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3457e5eab8eaeb67000005FullspectrummomThu, 09 Feb 2012 18:33:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3457e5eab8eaeb67000005
Not sure where you get the ninety eight percent- but those who do ignore the church do so largely out of ignorance. A reading of JPII's " Love and Responsibility" would prove to be inarguable (and indeed, more beautiful than any Keats or Shelley - valentine's take note). But who wants to read 288 pages of science, logic, and beauty, when there are ignorant headlines to be passed about and shared by no one who has bothered to ask why. Why does the church hold fast to this belief- that marital love is ultimately and inextricably tied to the parenting of children and indeed to the health of society and humanity itself.
And excellent points on fatherhood by the authors. Who can accept a patriarchal church who has never known the commitment and protection of a real, human father? I, as a woman, can submit to a father who has proven to love me and to have my best interests at heart ( even before his own)- even when I have not.
We know how short our attention spans have become: not only can we not read beyond sound bites, we cannot stay with one spouse, stay committed to repetition and structure ( which children hunger for) , stay with proven educational standards, nor sit through a church service that doesn't have big screens and cup holders.
This is the dearth of culture.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3455dd69beddb30a000043SydneyPetersonThu, 09 Feb 2012 18:25:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3455dd69beddb30a000043
Yes, but you're ignoring the fact that in non-Western developing countries access to contraception, especially the birth control pill, is very scarce, so whether or not a family wants or needs 13 kids is a moot point.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344da269beddbd75000073RJ BuchananThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:50:10 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344da269beddbd75000073
The most incredible good that has come out about this decision from the Obama administration is that many Catholics for the first time have heard this Church teaching from their priest or Bishop. It has been a topic greatly avoided because it is so controversial. Many Catholics are probably hearing what the actual Church doctrine is on these issues. Most importantly Humane Vitae is being talked about more now that it has been in 40 yrs. An incredible document some would say prophetic but it has been collecting dust since it was first presented. Whether you agree or disagree at least it is being talked about. The most apparent thing is what we see here in this discussion and have learned from the Protestant movement is that people can look at the same information and interpret it completely differently. The thing about truth though either both arguments are wrong, one or the other is the truth, but both of them can not be right.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344d48ecad04287200004dCalifornia MomThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:48:40 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344d48ecad04287200004d
The presumption that no birth control means larger families defies historical trends - long before the pill was invented. And for a contemporary perspective, I am a 44 year old woman who has exactly the number of kids I want (two); I've been pregnant exactly the number of times I chose, and I have successfully avoided pregnancy when needed/desired while remaining in complete compliance with Church teaching. The two only correlate if modern misperceptions are accepted as fact.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344b73eab8ea0d50000008LMRThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:40:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344b73eab8ea0d50000008
"The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any rganization or company. And the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years."
The church is not an earthly organization, it is the body of Christ who is the eternal UNCHANGING son of God. This issue is not a matter of tradition but of MORALITY and TRUTH. The truth doesn't change with the times.
When Christ restored the moral law to it's original glory, he removed any clauses which were added to accommodate the hardness of people's hearts (including things like polygamy and divorce rights). In Matt 19:8, we see that it is no longer acceptable to change the moral law of God to fit our preferences - we must accommodate to Him.
The main arguments FOR contraception are rooted in materialism, sexual freedom, and self indulgence. These are in exact opposition to Christ's teachings of self denial, detachment from material things, love for God (including His law) and neighbor above ourselves, and let's not forget the command from Genesis He quoted "to go forth and multiply".
As far as this concerns worldly resource consumption and material things - you are right in believing that the world cannot sustain a growing population of over indulgent, materialistic individuals who represent most of our society. In our current state, all luxuries have become "necessities" and we have become entitled and selfish, equating human life to material loss. We think "less children equals more stuff for myself and for the few children I want to raise as materialists".
Maybe if we didn't over eat, have the biggest houses, the most extreme vacations, or the nicest cars and clothing; maybe if we didn't prefer material possessions to human lives, more people could enjoy a modest and sustainable life instead of a few people using everything up for themselves.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344a7769bedd6b73000057MimiThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:36:39 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344a7769bedd6b73000057
The fact of the mattter is the church won't and can't change to suit your needs or anyone else's. Christ established his Church before leaving and gave authority to the Church on earth. It can't teach in error because it is guided and will continue to be guided by the Holy Spirit. The pill is abort aphasia and that is a SIN. There is one Person who will be judging on where my eternal resting place will be and that will not be you.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34486feab8ea2647000021SaraThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:27:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34486feab8ea2647000021
@soy catolica Actually, if you study NFP, it is perfect for people w/ unusual cycles because it uses your cycle alone to gauge. Couples are encouraged to follow the strictest rules (or abstain if necessary) for the first couple of months sometimes to see what might be going on medically. There are instructors, nurses, and doctors that can assist with making it work and learning the underlying reasons for some cycle issues...not just medicating so it looks "normal".
@Birth Control Helps the Economy To the point made about waiting a reasonable amount of time for newly married couples to have children, the Church teaches that we are to be open to life...not irresponsible or baby machines. That could be a very smart choice for many young couples, but birth control is not the healthiest way forward.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344618ecad04287200000evoice of reasonThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:18:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f344618ecad04287200000e
I am a devout Catholic woman in her 20s. I don't know just yet if I'll choose to do NFP in the future (and luckily don't have to think about it yet seeing as how I'm not serious with anyone at the moment). But I'd like to point out, my mother practiced NFP and was able to successfully postpone her pregnancies for several years after she first got married and did so to be financially stable. So it is possible it seems
I also have to add... (maybe it's just the hardcore feminist in me) that women aren't the only ones who can be used as sex objects. I love the Church, but they seem to forget that women are sexual beings too (and not just for procreation)! I think it would be amazingly easy for me to use a MAN as a sex object. Objectification goes both ways, and the women isn't always the helpless victim. People of the yesteryear generation don't seem to realize many women these days can very easily have sex without emotions; just like a man. You can blame that on birth control, or today's society or what have you, but women were made to be very sexual just like men. It's inherent in them and not just "created by today's society". This is just the first time, women feel they can be honest about it.
I'm so tired of the double standard. Men are allowed to be horny bastards because "that's just men being men" and yet if a woman has a strong sex drive, she must be a slut. I personally am a virgin, but have just as strong of a sex drive as any of my male peers. So if *I* can keep it in my pants, THEY have no excuse (they being men)! It's about time we stop excusing their sexual misconduct and expect more out of men.
Nothing angers me more than hearing "boys will be boys". First of all, that's a circular fallacy. and secondly, let's stop being so archaic of this whole thing!
PS- I apologize for some of my language. This subject is a little touchy for me.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34459f6bb3f78f2000000eWhat about the Spanish Inquisition and the whole abuse and cover up thing?Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:15:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34459f6bb3f78f2000000e
Your arguments are full of logical fallacies.
Where is your proof that being gay is a sign of sexual immaturity? They aren't that way because they are confused or can't get someone of the same sex....Rock Hudson was the Brad Pitt of his day, and could have virtually any gorgeous woman he wanted, but he was attracted to men. Gay people are no less or no more prone to sexual promiscuity than straight people.....and your point about pedophilia being worse than statutory rape: being gay or straight has nothing to do with that.
Also, to preempt what most ppl on your side say, they are born gay (or bi for that matter). Why would they choose a life of being mistreated and ridiculed by bigots? and many are disowned by their supposed good ol' Christian families.
In regards to the apparent ('apparent' b/c abuse cases tend to come our long after they happen) decline in abuse cases after the church implemented more stringent criteria, correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation...it's a logical fallacy, and you're disregarding other possible factors such as increased public scrutiny, decline in numbers (temporarily at least) of those attending, just to name a couple.
On the gay adoption issue....studies have shown that children in same-sex households turn out just as stable as those from straight households, and in most cases the only problem those kids have is the bigotry they face from others. The issue is that some of those catholic charities, like those from other denominations, receive government grants, and as such can't discriminate....remember that pesky 1st Amendment thing about the government 'not respecting an establishment of religion'? If it's theocracy you want, the US isn't the place to be.
On Martin Luther....again, you have a logical fallacy (ad Hominem)...you attack the guy's character (again, where's your proof?), so you dismiss what he had to say, and the fact that he led a movement that called out the almighty, infallible Catholic church on it's bs. I grew up in church, went to a baptist high school, have Catholic relatives, and I have read and studied the Bible, so don't try to bs me on this issue. Also, in several of your posts, you constantly attack protestants and try to absolve the catholic church of everything.....what's with all the animosity?
And by no means do I defend the protestants...to me, organized religion of any stripe is a turn off. I respect what individuals and individual churches do for their communities (catholics included), what I don't like is the dogmatism and grand-standing by supposed religious leaders.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3442a669beddb164000053RachelThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:03:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3442a669beddb164000053
It is rare that anyone gets pregnant by natural means in high quantities. however, there ARE prevention methods that are not degrading to women, harmful to the fetus, and are actually unifying to the marriage bond because it includes the decision and action of both spouses. Check out: www.ccli.org
So, NO ... the Church should NEVER be "flexible" when it comes to the intrinsic value of someone. I am proud that we have never swayed in defending the marriage union and the dignity of every man, woman and child. Instead, we use science to increase and preserve the dignity in the midst of a world screaming otherwise.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3442406bb3f78c14000056SaraThu, 09 Feb 2012 17:01:36 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3442406bb3f78c14000056
I believe that the pregnancy test is utilized to insure that there is not a pregnancy already in the works prior to the rape.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343f2e6bb3f76d16000004KTThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:48:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343f2e6bb3f76d16000004
So you are saying you want to kill babies so that crime will go down?? lol you cant make something Right by making it Wrong. You are ASSUMING that if you kill unborn babies that havent even had the CHANCE to LIVE that crime will decrease. Thats crazy! How do you know that those children will commit crimes. What f one of those babies was a saint, or the next great president, or someone who could have saved a life, or maybe in later years saved your life some how. And where are you getting these so called "facts" from. In my opinion there is more crime now then there has ever been! It sems to me it has been increasing just like the numer of babies in this world are DYING. Oh and by the way ABORTION is a crime. It is KILLLING a LIFE. Here is a real argument...has it accurred to you that when a reporter says on the news that a mother who is pregnant dies in a car crash or is sadly murdered the police counts it as TWO deaths (the mother and the baby). But when the doctors are performing an abortion they say (unfortunaately) that they are removing a "clump of cells." Its not a clump of cells its a life. The baby has little toes, hands, eyes, and a heartbeat.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c6a69bedd7d5800002dEThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:36:42 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c6a69bedd7d5800002d
The answer, my friend, is natural family planning. Wonderful solution that gives the abiltiy to plan children while remaining open to God's will in sexual union, respecting our bodies, and upholding the dignity of man and woman in marriage. This ain't your mama's 28-day rhythm method. Lots of science to back it up, reading the woman's body signals...also nice not to ingest a bunch of chemicals. Check out creighton method, sympto-thermal method...a few others are out there too.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c436bb3f70c0600005cDonna GratehouseThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:36:03 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c436bb3f70c0600005c
A pregnancy test is useless during the window of time that EC works. Pregnancy tests don't work until implantation.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c36ecad04f55900004eKCThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:35:50 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c36ecad04f55900004e
People can afford having more kids. They just can't afford their lifestyle if they were to have more children. Even if they can't afford more children there is always Natural Family Planning which a lot of people end up doing after they find out that they cannot have children because the birth control they have been taking for so many years has messed up their reproductive system and their hormones. People are selfish and want what they don't need. That is all it comes down to. Just because certain Catholics ignore the policy doesn't make it right. Just because tons of Jews were killed and a swarm of people didn't think it was wrong, doesn't make it right.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c10ecad04de5f000019Laura TaylorThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:35:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343c10ecad04de5f000019
Henry...I think the Catholic Church just needs to come clean and just admit up front why it is opposed to birth control. It is not because it is "abortion" or not part of God's plan - there is nothing in the Bible that definitively says that prevention of pregnancy is wrong or is tantamount to murder (and be fruitful and multiply is part of the Old Testament, is probably a myth and completely irrelevant today). The truth is that if Catholics practice effective birth control, it means exactly one thing and only one thing...fewer Catholics in the world. Fewer Catholics means less money in Catholic coffers. And less money means less political power. No church in history has committed more human atrocities in the name of God and the church than the Catholic Church. Millions have died at it's hands because of intractable religious dogma, none of which reflects the teachings of Christ. It has tacitly been a co-conspirator with priests and other church officials who have committed sex crimes against young children and spent years sweeping it under the rug. It's no secret that at least in America, Catholicism's numbers are decreasing alarmingly - there are copious commercials on television today under the theme of "Catholics Come Home" which highlights all of the pious and charitable things the church has done throughout history, but fails to mention the Inquisition, the Crusades, burnings at the stake, murders and the total corruption of the Papacy in more than just one historical incident (the Borgias were not the only ones). Revisionist history is always very interesting. Why do Catholics need to "come home"? Are they running from something? My guess is that they are running from a dogmatic religion that does not meet the needs of a modern society and does not focus on the love and teachings of Christ, but instead on the constant specter of the yawning maws of hell. That's enough to scare anyone into seeking God elsewhere, much less its intractable stance on birth control, women's roles within the church and other controversial issues. I am not Catholic, but Protestant and Methodist. Each week, we accept new members into our church and almost without fail, one or more of them have transferred their memberships from a Catholic church, at the risk of losing their "mortal souls". Guess it was worth the risk to find a more accepting and loving environment in which to commune with God.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343bc16bb3f70c06000052Sapivi ObrienThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:33:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343bc16bb3f70c06000052
If more people make the world a better place, then why are you justifying wars that kill millions with God? Does your God only love those who are exactly like you? I was always told he love Everyone equally.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343b9f69bedd1f51000057TerryThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:33:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343b9f69bedd1f51000057
Henry-- the Truth does not change with circumstances and you may want to do some research (likely to take years) into who the Catholic Church is--however, prayer is the key.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343748ecad04e857000017JimThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:14:48 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343748ecad04e857000017
Articles and nonsense like this is why I denounced my Catholic upbringing. Simply paying attention in a history class would tell you that the recorded infidelities and single mothers were just as high, if not higher, than today. But no, you wouldn't bother to look up anything or check facts because that would conflict with your beliefs, and you can't have any type of questioning in your religion. Again, that's why I left.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3436f7eab8ea3424000046Jan LieThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:13:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3436f7eab8ea3424000046
We got married right out of college. I didn't have a job. My wife did. Then she got pregnant. If she hadn't, I would have sat on my ass and dreaded job-searching longer, but ultimately our finances would not have gotten any better. Her pregnancy was the catalyst for our growing up. The amount of empirical evidence that shows personal growth truly happens in difficulty is overwhelming. There is no preparing for kids until you actually have them. No one has any idea what they're getting in to, and you can never understand the love a parent has for a child until you become a mother or father.
Waiting until your finances are in order quickly turns in to waiting until I spend a two-week vacation in Italy, waiting until I get a new big-screen TV, waiting until I get a new car, a bigger house, until your wife is 35 and you end up spending 10 grand on fertility treatments, and quite frankly are no more emotionally mature than you were at 23.
Getting ready is a myth. We have two kids now, and make do with a single income. It's not going to last forever, but expanding our family will force us to take steps to provide for our children. That is what responsible people do. Necessity drives it. There are some of us who forsake many of the flashy nice things we could buy, who don't go in to debt up to our eyeballs for trinkets and status symbols, who feed a family of four on two thousand a month and don't go on food stamps, who work hard to advance, and who had absolutely no idea what the heck we were getting into when we had kids. I'm not trying to be sanctimonious. I have plenty of time for frivolous activity. I don't got to Church as much as I should. But to suggest that young people can't make it unless they are on birth control is backwards. In my case, our marriage and our emotional growth would be dead with birth control, as dead as our unborn children.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3435076bb3f7d501000012Melanie NygaardThu, 09 Feb 2012 16:05:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3435076bb3f7d501000012
If the kids are grown, it is likely that your uncle's wife was using the rhythm method which is NOT natural family planning. NFP is scientific and works very well, whereas the rhythm method simply did not work for some women's cycles. There's a lot of confusion out there about this, but NFP does not equal the rhythm method.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3432a06bb3f7ad72000062Donna GratehouseThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:54:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3432a06bb3f7ad72000062
"I'm not going to tell anyone what they must believe.."
Okay, good. Then don't.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343247eab8eada1000004eMegsthebossillaThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:53:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343247eab8eada1000004e
My fiance and I have waited 7 years and by the time we get married, it will be 7 3/4 years. We were waiting to get married because we both were trying to find decent jobs after college. We have been virgins all our lives and we will be virgins when we get married.
I have taken my example from my Grandfather on my mom's side who had 9 children in a little suburb and not one of them is lost. All of them have decent jobs, stable mental health, own their own homes, and 8 of 9 are married with children. All of them have paid their way through technical school or college. My grandfather's advice to me was to remember God as a provider. He told me about a time when they were so poor that he tried to shoot rabbits in the backyard for dinner. He never got any, but they never starved. His family pulled together to help. Yes, it took some humility to accept it, but then he paid them back when he got back on his feet. My grandfather also had to deal with racism against him, keeping him from high positions when he was more qualified. He had to change his name to get any sort of education because his race was assumed to be "stupid". Grandma also had to deal with the anxiety of knowing Grandpa had been drafted during the Korean war and sent to Korea- when they first got married. I could go on and on about their difficulties, but I imagine your eyes are glazing over.
My parents on the other hand, used birth control because they didn't know any better- that's what was popular in the 70's. My mom still regrets it for multiple reasons.
tldr version: If our ancestors could survive war, hard economic times, racism, etc and still have the gift of children, what better example could they have shown us? I have a strong support system as a result of my grandparents' decision. I would want the same for my family. Where there is love, there cannot be fear.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343180eab8ea4b15000053Lucy BordoThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:50:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f343180eab8ea4b15000053
The world may have changed a lot in 2000 years, but moral standards should not change. Good is good; evil is evil. Those do not change even in the midst of "progress."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342ebdecad04d241000024EricThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:38:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342ebdecad04d241000024
Its called self control, not condoms. Nature has provided for a way of having sex and not getting pregnant. Have enough self control and wait a week
Not to mention the Mayo clinic has done studies on the pill and showed a very strong link to breast cancer. Did you know the pill is a class 1 carcinogin (sp?), guess what else is class 1, Cigaretteshttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342ddfecad04c03f000040tomdurkThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:34:39 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342ddfecad04c03f000040
And it can start paying taxes and reject state subsidies.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342daf69bedda63100004bLiz GrierThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:33:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342daf69bedda63100004b
atheism=superiority complexhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342c9069bedd2d40000004tomdurkThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:29:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342c9069bedd2d40000004
Agree w/ real followers of Jesus who are for universal health care, feeding & clothing the needy, ending capital punishment & illegal/immoral wars.
Not so much w/ the Church, esp on child rape.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342c8eeab8ea4e15000007AnonymousThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:29:02 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342c8eeab8ea4e15000007
So many flaws in this article:
1. Population growth is slowing BECAUSE of contraception. It won't stay that way if we get rid of contraception.
2. Women who can only have sex to get pregnant are objects. Women who can freely choose when they have babies are empowered. Look at the increase in women's equality since the Pill was invented. Drastically more women have higher ranking and paying jobs, more go to college, etc. The "women are treated like objects" arguement... hello we've always been treated as objects. You can't just point at the internet and say oh hey online porn wasn't here 50 years ago therefore women weren't treated like objects 50 years ago (we were, more so).
3. If the government allowing women to use contraception is "government coercion in reproductive matters" then what is the government not allowing women to use contraception? If you ask me, that's a lot more controlling than giving me the choice to use or not use it.
4. So the article is saying if I don't take my moral cues from the Church, then I'm taking them from "who? Britney Spears?" You don't have to be Catholic to be a moral person.
5. Fathers leaving their baby mamas has nothing to do with contraception. If they had used contraception, then they wouldn't have a baby for him to leave behind. If people could choose when they are ready to have babies with a mate who they trust (instead of an accident or a rape), there would be less abortions, orphans, and neglected/unloved children in the world.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342b906bb3f7b672000005Katie MooreThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:24:48 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342b906bb3f7b672000005
You know, it's funny that studies have proven that the current population of the Earth could fit in an area the size of Los Angeles, so I don't think that critics can use overpopulation as a ridiculous excuse to advocate contraception. Why do people have such a problem with the fact that us Catholics want to advocate abstinence and reject contraception? Is there something wrong with morality? I don't know about you, but I thought that morality was something that we were taught as children to look up to. Why suddenly has its become the enemy of social norms? Social normality should be morality and wanting to improve our lives. The Catholic view of saving sex and children for marriage may seem "outdated" to many (too many in my opinion) but in fact it has proven to be the healthier and safer option. In a society so focused on looks, health and status, why don't more people practice abstinence? It's the only method of contraception that is 100% fool-proof against STDs and pregnancy!
I pray for this world and the children that will never be born...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3428676bb3f76964000039PhloontThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:11:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3428676bb3f76964000039
If birth control helps the economy, would the economy be at its best if no one had any children at all? Most of the western countries are literally dying because of their catastrophically low fertility rates brought about by contraception.
Who do you expect to pay your social security and medicare benefits? We need a growing population for long-term economic health and stability.
Think of it this way: If the population of the earth was reduced to 100,000, would all those people really be enormously rich? Or does population growth bring about even greater economic growth when people are left to take care of themselves and their communities?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34283169bedd8b2c000066Ed RamseyThu, 09 Feb 2012 15:10:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34283169bedd8b2c000066
Henry,
Several points:
1. Much like the religious fundamentalists predicting the "end of the world" every 5 years, so called "scholars" have been preaching about the imminent "population bomb" since Malthus. The problem is that this is simply an unproven theory.
2. If by "policy", you mean "dogma", which is essentially a teaching about morality (right from wrong), the point is not to be "practical". Right is right and sin is sin, no matter what the practicality is. Fighting WW2 was not practical. Genocide may be practical. Perhaps we should start with all of the annoying people first in order to save the planet? Who will make that choice?
3. Here is a shocker. If you don't want to have children, then don't have sex. Ever heard of natural family planning? You are absolutely right the Catholics do not have to follow this dogma. We don't have to abide by anything for that matter. It is not as if the Church police are going to get you. One can choose to be obedient or not. The Church is not the judge, God is.
4. Church dogma does not "change with the times". That is why it is doctrine. It can become more refined, but it cannot and will not ever contradict itself. Morality does not change. People were, are, and always will be sinful. How could morality change? If morality does change, then there is no such thing as "right and wrong"! Mind you that I am not saying that there are no changes in the Church, for example liturgy, lenten fasting, etc. Those are "disciplines". I am referring to "doctrine".
In charity,http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342490ecad04b537000012Drew KowalskiThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:54:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f342490ecad04b537000012
I suspect the author would benefit from looking up the words causation and correlation. Just because X and Y both happen does not mean that X causes Y. Oh if only our world were so simple that one could end worldly strife by banning rubbers.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3423deeab8eac47f000039Colin GormleyThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:51:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3423deeab8eac47f000039
" They can't afford 13 kids these days."
Who said the Church required that? Natural Family Planning is a perfectly valid means to regulate childbearing and spacing births. Besides, if society has become so hostile that raising a family is very difficult, how is it that the CHURCH is supposed to change? A society hostile to kids is a society that has decided it won't continue.
Societies rise and fall. The Church has been around for 2000 years. I'll stick with the proven winner.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3423b669beddb42c00000dHelloThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:51:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3423b669beddb42c00000d
@The Board Room: Dude, don't talk about things you don't know about. My husband and I use NFP and we only have TWO kids. Just because you don't contracept, doesn't mean you'll have a bajillion kids. Why are people so ignorant about this? Yes, I realize people have gotten pregnant using NFP. Guess what? People get pregnant ALL THE TIME using contraception. I'm so glad the Church is the one place I can count on staying true to Truth when the rest of world makes up their own rules as they go along. Good luck with that.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3422b669bedd2f2a000007MagistraThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:47:02 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3422b669bedd2f2a000007
The authors seem to have missed some salient facts - like about 2,000 years of history. The Roman empire which fell was a Christian one, and had been for a long, long time. The citations from Humanae vitae ('general lowering of moral standards, a rise in infidelity, and illegitimacy, the reduction of women to objects used to satisfy men') existed long before the development of artificial birth control and were often the result of actions by the Roman Catholic Church and its leaders. If 'government coercion in reproductive matters' was less efficient, that was only because technology lagged and the gap had to be made up by killing those already born. Those bloviators who claim such evils result from contraception are hopelessly ignorant and/or wilfully naive about the nature of Western society in the middle ages, Renaissance and early modern era.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34223a6bb3f75b60000027LouThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:44:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34223a6bb3f75b60000027
@ soy catolica
My wife has extremely irregular cycles, and we've been married 2.5 years. No kids yet, using nothing but NFP.
It's anecdotal, but it's my experience.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3421acecad04cd31000011defender3Thu, 09 Feb 2012 14:42:36 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3421acecad04cd31000011
Thank you for standing up for the correct view of the church and just a note NFP had been shown to actually be more effective than birth control!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f341d99ecad04a423000047TristenThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:25:13 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f341d99ecad04a423000047
The Church doesn't teach that you must have as many kids as possible. They teach that it is up to the couple to abstain or go for it depending on their circumstances. Natural Family Planning has a 99% success rate, so whether you are deciding to postpone or are for that matter trying to achieve pregnancy, not to mention the detection of early health problems. The Church realizes that God gave humans brains to learn about our sexual reproduction and to work with it accordingly. I could say much more but I will stop now. :)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f341b4169beddda13000026maxw3stThu, 09 Feb 2012 14:15:13 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f341b4169beddda13000026
One major mis-statement made above is that the Catholic church has brought us great thinkers. I have to wonder how da Vinci or Frances Bacon, or Gallileo, or countless others, would have been able to really contribute to the knowledge base of man without interference and murder by the Catholic church. Not to single out Catholics however; all major organized religions have historically repressed the pursuit of knowledge similarly. It's how they lock in their "fan" base & control governments. In short, nothing good has ever come out of organized religion, unless you find bigotry and thought control to be good things.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3416e2eab8eaf357000075Josh FischerThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:56:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3416e2eab8eaf357000075
Hey Henry,
Have you heard of Natural Family Planning? To sum it up, it's a process that evaluates the women's natural cycle to determine when couples are able to have sex without getting pregnant, or vice versa. This great tool is approved by the Catholic Church, and has proven extremely effective. According to "Science Daily" a research on NFP showed that when used correctly by not having sex during periods of high fertility, NFP has a 0.4% failure rate. If I'm not mistaken condemns are around 98% effective. Another interesting fact concerning NFP is the divorce rate. According to a study by California State University, the average divorce rate of couples using NFP is 2-5%. As the national divorce rate is now just above 50%.
I understand the world has changed in the last 2,000 years, but does that mean our morals should? If so I'm scared to see what the worlds is going to look like in the future.
<a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070221065200.htm" target="_blank">http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070221065200.htm</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3415a36bb3f71e4000004fAlphonsus Jr. Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:51:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3415a36bb3f71e4000004f
Excellent article. It causes those conformed to the world to foam at the mouth, but no matter. Good work.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3414996bb3f73e3e00004aMaryThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:46:49 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3414996bb3f73e3e00004a
I have 8 kids and expecting # 9. I would like to say 2 things.
First, I agree with some comments about the fact that we cannot proof if there is a real connection between "contraception" and the "using" of women, or infidelity or even divorce. Are couples who use NFP happier? Were women staying with there husbands before because there was no knwoledge of the pill??? Is sociaty less moral now than before? etc...
Now, there are things that are a fact. Like the reality that Catalunya, a small country in Spain, where I'm actually from, will disappear because people are having no kids. So, no matter how many things are being done so "catalan" doesn't become a dead language, the fact is that if you walk through barcelona you would find more muslims than catalans and in a few years there will be no more catalan.
Second. I think that at the bottom of the "sexual revolution" there is a thirst to want to control our lives and take God out of the picture. A big argument in favor of contraception and abortion is that "women have a right to control their bodies". Now, Would we have to use abortion and contraceptives if we could actually control our bodies? We cannot control life. No matter how much we wanted to have 13 kids, we cannot if God doesn't want to give the life. No matter how much we want a boy, we may have a girl and no matter how much we wanted not to be "fertile", we are.
So, We want to take God out of our lives thinking that without "that" child our live is going to be better. But we may die tomorrow and nobody has the power to change that.
I choose to have God control my life. This doesn't mean everyone should have 13 kids. It doesn't mean that NFP is the solution to everything (NFP is difficult, not always effective and doesn't always makes marriages stronger) Doesn't mean that all the marriages that are open to life are going to be great.
And I'm not having my 9th child because he is going to find the cure to cancer (he may be down, anyway) I'm having her/him because that was God's plan for me.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3413a36bb3f77b46000017RusselThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:42:43 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3413a36bb3f77b46000017
There is no doubt in my mind that these changes are in fact occurring. It is pretty disgusting what the dating scene has turned into if you ask me, but to claim that all of these changes are due to birth control is downright absurd. In the last 40 years there has been an incredible improvement in technology. Is that also a result of birth control? Of course not. You can't just take 2 separate issues and invent correlations between them. Times change and moral values change with them. The pill is irrelevant to the downward spiral of societies moral values. The article expects us to believe everything it says because, "The idea that widely-available contraception hasn't led to dramatic societal change....is a much sillier notion than anything the Catholic Church teaches us." That is the extent of the proof given for the relation between birth control and all of the issues listed. It is logic like this and rash statements without proof that make people question the church. It is shocking that an article with zero proof was allowed to be published.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34139b6bb3f73f33000032Lois KobbThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:42:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34139b6bb3f73f33000032
I could just as easily argue that everything that makes life miserable for humanity also comes from human beings: war, hatred, greed, religion, bigotry, misogyny, pollution, destruction of forests, etc. More people means more misery, more war, more destruction. The next Adolf Hitler could be somebody's fourth child that they decided to have based on the teachings of the Catholic Church.
Like all devout Catholics, this person does not think about what he believes, he just accepts it all with the mindlessness of a robot, and repeats whatever nonsense spews from the Pope's lips.
By the way, what is an article like this even doing in a site devoted to business?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34134f6bb3f70f3c000044Thomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:41:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34134f6bb3f70f3c000044
Bravo Amanda. You summarized it better than anyone.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3412a56bb3f73b4000001cThomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:38:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3412a56bb3f73b4000001c
If there is no link between breast cancer and birth control pills, then why did the World Health Organization classify it as a carcinogen for breast cancer, liver cancer and cervical cancer (this last one because the estrogen causes the HPV virus to multiply at a much higher rate, causing the cancer to occur). Also, when I was in medical school in the 1990's, every woman undergoing menopause was placed on hormone replacement therapy (basically nearly the same thing as birth control pills accept that the daily dose of estrogen was the same throughout the month) to prevent osteoporosis, breast cancer, and heart disease. Within 10 years this was dropped because these woman were getting more breast cancer and heart attacks. I don't need others to tell me what the pill can cause, because as a neurologist I have seen several 20-something year old woman (non-smokers, no other risk factors) have strokes and disability for the rest of their lives thanks to being on the birth control pill. You are right, the pill is great for men--no responsibility on their part, all the health problems occuring in the women they can take advantage of for their pleasure. Its interesting that when the pill was first developed in the 1960's, research on a male contraceptive was dropped because some men developed shrinking of their testicles. In the female pill research, several women died of blood clots, but the pill was eventually approved anyway. The problem with feminists or "liberated" women these days is they don't understand that because of the pill they have simply become a sexual object for men, who don't have to worry about responsibility. So Pope Paul VI was right, women think they have more rights, but in fact they have simply lost their dignity, with feminists shunning the most beautiful thing a woman can become--a mother (nothing is greater in life, even if you become President of the U.S., being a mother supercedes that a thousand times). We men are the weaker sex, because we can never become a mother--and that is the most beautiful idea God ever created.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f340f2becad042f0d00001cLMSThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:23:39 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f340f2becad042f0d00001c
@ Spanish Inquisition: You're right -- the Church isn't perfect. That was never my claim. As with any human organization on Earth, perfection is unattainable. Just as the Church has had scandal of various types throughout the past 2,000 years, so too have teachers been found guilty of the mistreatment of students, doctors been guilty of the mistreatment of patients, etc. My point is not to finger-point but simply to say that unfortunately morality has not always been at the heart of the Catholic Church just as it has not been at the heart of other institutions. I am not trying to paint a rosy picture as that was not the point of my discussion. My point is simply that the Church has stood firm in its teachings and has not changed its teachings to fit the "changing times" or comforts of the people. The teachings have stood the test of time even if some of those carrying out those teachings have done a less-than-perfect job at carrying them out.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f340cbaecad04fb76000033hvThu, 09 Feb 2012 13:13:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f340cbaecad04fb76000033
How can you say "nobody wants thirteen children?" That's pretty bold to presume speaking for the entire world that way. In fact, we are friends with families who have nine or ten children (in case you are in doubt, every one of which was "wanted"). They also were upset to not be able to welcome more. In addition, just because a couple doesn't use contraception doesn't mean they will naturally have thirteen children. My husband and I have been married for twelve years and only have four. If the world we live in wasn't so hung up on sex and satisfying their every desire without consequences, they would also realize that a woman is not able to conceive a child 365 days a year. There are such things as self control and periodic abstinence in a marriage. They aren't the dirty words our society makes them out to be.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f340801ecad044206000001PorfessorKZThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:53:05 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f340801ecad044206000001
Glad you ain't my doctor. Oh its not the parents fault that raised this women about morals its because the church doesn't have enough control over young boys? Most moral people are atheists. More wackiness in the world is from those whose believe because they have the excuse of God will forgive me.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34073feab8eaf34b000005PorfessorKZThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:49:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34073feab8eaf34b000005
You mean the largest franchise in the world? How many times has the Church changed it message to keep its flock tiding. Let's see it used to be a sin to eat meat on Fridays. That's what has happened to the world from everybody eating meat on Fridays and farting cause more carbon emissions.
Human behavior has not changed in thousands of years and way before religion became a business. You don't have a right to do whatever you want whether you believe in God or not. More people have been killed in the name of God than for territory, love and honor. There were tons of divorces back in the 30s and 40s when the church had a larger hold on people. People are people and some are sheeple. The more the church and government tell people to do something the more human nature wants the "apple". Church is a private ordeal and has no business in politics or in public affairs. Humanity and civility should take hold in the public. In fact, its time for the Church to pay taxes since they are so involved with politics and their houses are open 7 days a week instead of the one day one and why the tax exempt status, Pay up.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3407106bb3f7fb24000016Michael MThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:49:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3407106bb3f7fb24000016
"Illegitimacy: way up. In 1960, 5.3% of all births in America were to unmarried women. By 2010, it was 40.8% [PDF]. In 1960 married families made up almost three-quarters of all households; but by the census of 2010 they accounted for just 48 percent of them. Cohabitation has increased tenfold since 1960."
Frankly, this seems like a pretty clear synopsis of why people should be using birth control or considering it more frequently, not avoiding it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34029869bedd805700000bJMJThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:30:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f34029869bedd805700000b
I can't believe you would consider the crime rate in this issue. We forget that that the number of people in religious vocations has also decreased dramatically. Think of how many future priests, nuns or other religious that were aborted.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fff869bedd545a000001hrThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:18:48 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fff869bedd545a000001
why do all of these people who have children out of wedlock have to be considered negative? can't a woman have a child without a man if she so chooses? or, heaven forbid people choose to be together but have no desired to get married... can't that happen? in the 1960s, women WERE seen as objects- baby makers and home makers... not money makers. infidelity was present then as well, but it was not publicized as it is today. and, how exactly, does one measure a "general lowering of moral standards"? i'm not arguing if it's true or false, but because times were VERY different back then, it's hard to judge how moral a society was... remember, al gore didn't invent the internet until much later. this article has too many holes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ff636bb3f72a22000003Jonathan MonsalveThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:16:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ff636bb3f72a22000003
The Church has many reasons to oppose birth control, not just the highly problematic social ones outlined above.
Ultimately the position of the Church stems from the nature of human sexuality as they understand it, therefore, for the Church it is foremost a moral point of contention, not just a social one. Changing the position on birth control would be morally compromising.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fde2eab8eaf72c000074Thomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:09:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fde2eab8eaf72c000074
The fact is a fact by a survey of the independent John Jay Foundation: 84% of priest abuse victims were teenage boys. That is homosexuality, just like a high school teacher sexually abusing high school girls is statutory rape, but it is not pedophilia (that is a more profound disorder). Homosexuality is a sign of sexual immaturity, as is having sexual activity outside of marriage, and therefore though there is not test for homosexuality, the Church is now weeding out immature men of both persuasions. A lot of homosexuals in the 1960's and 70's wanted to avoid the destructive gay culture and thought that maybe becoming a priest would change that, so they became priests for the wrong reason. And so when the temptations came, they took advantage of easy access to teenage boys and society's blind eye. When a man enters the seminary these days, he is expected to be a mature man who has even dated (some bishops were even engaged before they felt a call to the priesthood), a man who would be a great dad and husband, but decides (as Jesus said in the Bible) to "become a eunuch for sake of the kingdom of heaven." So that is why the amount of sexual abuse has dropped dramatically after the admissions criteria for seminaries became more stringent. I have friends in the seminaries, who are now evaluated rigourously every year to rule out any psychiatric pathology. Also, one vocations director told me that he would simply ask the applicants for seminary if they were gay, and surprisingly most of the ones who were gay told the truth. I am not saying that the gay men who wanted to become priests were insincere or trying to lie to get in, they were simply thinking that was their call, so they will tell the vocations director the truth, believe it or not.
The Catholic Church is more sensitive, because it tends to stick to its guns, when other churches give up. For example, in Illinois the Catholic Church left the adoption business in order not to refer children to homosexual couples, but the on the surface more conservative Missouri Synod Lutheran Church succumbed and is now referring children to homosexual couples against the tenets of their faith. We Catholics simply stick to our guns, so we are hated by others. That is why Christians were persecuted in the Roman Empire, not because they had a different religion, but because they felt they were the only true religion, and Jesus could not simply be put into the pantheon of Roman gods. So the Catholic Church continues that tradition, we have the truth, everybody hates us for it, and wants to destroy us. As far as Luther, he was mentally deranged, worrying his whole life that he would go to hell, so he made up a religion in which he simply had to believe in Jesus to go to heaven. Indulgences are great, I do them all the time for myself and the souls in purgatory, its the best ticket to heaven and it doesn't cost a dime (in Luther's time, it didn't cost anything either, but the secular rulers were lying about that to embezzle money for themselves that was ment by the people to go to Rome--these same secular rulers easily became Protestant, so they could tell people what to do and not listen to the Pope, who all too often would defend the poor against such tyrants).http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fd5a6bb3f7a51b000026rukiddingcuThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:07:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fd5a6bb3f7a51b000026
did you know that we have never dropped back to the lower crime rate of the 1940's, 50's and early 60's, before abortion and birth control. so maybe you and your lifted arguments from freakanomics would agree that the increased depravity and moral decay of the 1960s and 1970s lead to an increase in american crime, till reagan started to turn america around.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fcafecad04a36500005dRichard AnterThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:04:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fcafecad04a36500005d
Being a logical, thoughtful person who likes to consider all angles, I thought the same thing too...until I read this:
<a href="http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/planet-un-parenthood" target="_blank">http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/planet-un-parenthood</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fc02eab8eab028000086LidiaThu, 09 Feb 2012 12:01:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33fc02eab8eab028000086
Add a comment...
"But more importantly, the policy is just completely impractical. People don't want 13 kids these days. They can't afford 13 kids these days. And that's why 98% of Catholics ignore the policy.
The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company. And the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years. "
Policy???? It's not a policy,it's a basice tenent of our Faith. If a matter of faith is true, then it's true for all time. The world may have changed, but truth doesn't change.
Please know that the Catholic Faith does not demand anyone to have more kids than they can afford. If a couple cannot afford any more kids then they can do that awful thing called "abstaining" during their 48-72 hour fertile period. Natural family Planning has the same effectiveness rate as the pill. Some Catholics have somehow forgotten (or don't want to realize) that, despite what the media portrays, we are not slaves to our sexual drives. Some have also forgotten the purpose of the sexual act, a twofold purpose of bonding and procreation; and that taking one of those purposes out of the formula is a perversion on the act itself.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33faab6bb3f7c011000057tomdurkThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:56:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33faab6bb3f7c011000057
To the authors: starting with the conclusion you want, then making heroic logical leaps backward based on wrong assumptions, is not any way to make a coherent argument.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f9cf69bedd404400002fDonna GratehouseThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:52:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f9cf69bedd404400002f
I disagree. It's a very poor defense. As someone pointed out downthread, it doesn't establish cause and effect and assumes that sex is inherently immoral. It's also based on a sanitized view of pre-1960s history that ignores all the broken families, illegitimacy, and sexual abuse and exploitation that took place.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f8e2eab8eaab2800004bDonna GratehouseThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:48:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f8e2eab8eaab2800004b
Religion has guilt-tripped and manipulated people throughout history to accept miserable lives and follow arbitrary rules under the promise of eternal bliss or threat of eternal damnation.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f8026bb3f7780b00007bMo-TThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:44:50 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f8026bb3f7780b00007b
wait...when could people afford 13 kids? If a Church claims to teach True moral standards (which it obviously should, what else is the point of a Church?) then why would those teachings change? If teachings change because people change, then abortion and contraception should be acceptable. And then, once a certain amount of husbands beat their wives, we could say "well, the times have changed, it's now okay to beat our wives. society used to be different, women used to be more submissive so we didn't need to beat them." And then, once enough people start stealing we would say, "well, stealing is accepted by society now, it's okay for everyone to do it!"
Come on, what I'm saying is obviously absurd. But that is the logical consequence of saying "The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company. And the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years." The difference is that the Church isn't just an organization, and it simply is not a company.
The Church is so much more -- it is intimately united with the Trinity (God, Jesus, Holy Spirit) and it always has been. And God has not changed in 2000 years. God has never changed His expectations based on the way people act -- it has always been the other way around, and it always will. That, like most things in the Church, is the opposite of the way it works in the rest of the world.
But whether or not you believe what we do about the Church, and whether or not you believe what the Church teaches on these things that's fine, but, "The Church needs to change with the times" simply isn't a good argument. It's the same as saying, "Everybody's doing it." And, just like when your mom said, "If everybody was jumping off a bridge, would you do it?" Just because a lot of people do something, does not mean it is a Good, True and Beautiful thing to do.
Oh, and 98% of Catholics ignore this policy? (Which, by the way, isn't a policy, so much as it is a moral standard that God revealed to man in the Old Testament to help us live Good, True and Beautiful lives.) Is that one of the 72% of statistics that people just make up?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f762eab8ead72100005cThomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:42:10 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f762eab8ead72100005c
Birth control is still wrong, as in the Catholic Church's teaching a sexual act in marriage needs to be unitive and procreative, meaning there are no barriers between them. Therefore a sexual act is an act of complete love, not one where the husband or wife simply want to have fun (and therefore they use their husband or wife as tool, just like someone would use a sexual toy or a prostitute). Therefore, the couple is disrespecting each other when they use contraception. On the other hand, a woman is only fertile for about 6 days a month and this period can be determined either through temperature charting or through the Clear Blue monitor, and the Church is ok with that, because periods of infertility are natural. So without putting a bunch of toxic chemicals in your body (hormonal birth control pills are listed as class I carcinogens by the World Health Organization), you can avoid pregnancy by simply avoiding sex for about 6 to 10 days a month and the Church would be fine with that. We're not rabbits, so I think that is not too much of a burden, and its all natural (the other natural way of avoiding pregnancy is breast feeding when the baby wants to--no pumping)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f6f8ecad047659000086WowzersThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:40:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f6f8ecad047659000086
Camilo, sorry dude. That is one of the WACKIEST things I have ever read from one of the WACKIEST sites I have ever seen!
"Antipope Paul VI!" hahahaha!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f61fecad04aa5b000050tomdurkThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:36:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f61fecad04aa5b000050
Bizarre article, and probably from the 16th century. . If 98% of Catholics use birth control (and some opposed the death penalty & illegal unholy wars) the "Church" is I can understand why Maggie Gallagher hates people who have sex and actually enjoy it (a fellow member of her conservative club got her pregnant & Yale & dumped her) , but to propose "sex for married coupled only & only to procreate" is not going to catch on. Seriously. The Church can't speak for all of its members, and given their record on child sexual abuse, probably shouldn't. If you want to start making Jesus' beliefs public policy, start with universal health care, ending multi trillion dollar wars, and ending the death penalty.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f56569bedd693f00000eThomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:33:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f56569bedd693f00000e
Yes, but until the Communists took over, the ideal of Chinese society was having many children, so the current population control culture goes against Chinese civilization, as well as Catholic civilization (which is based on natural law, meaning based on common sense that the family is the building block of society--something every culture embraced until the last 50 years)....http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f555eab8eaaf1d000068InStatuViatorisThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:33:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f555eab8eaaf1d000068
Harmless to whom?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f48269bedd0e2e000057Donna GratehouseThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:29:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f48269bedd0e2e000057
I'll say this about the freaking out over contraception coverage. It's refreshing to see the anti-choice movement forget to pretend it's all about "life" and make it clearly obvious that they are motivated by anxiety over sexual freedom.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f429eab8ea291900004eThomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:28:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f429eab8ea291900004e
There is one obvious proof, social security was booming when the baby boomers were paying into it and since there were more of them then their parents, SS was salient. Now with less children then baby boomers here, in Europe,and Asia, there is not enough people to sustain the older generation and their health and other needs (unless you want to support euthanasia like the Obama administration). For example, in Japan the situation is so bleak (because Japanese have few children like we do, but they do not have the immigration population that helps sustain us from going down the drain), that statisticians have calculated that if the birth rate there continues, there will be 100 Japanese in 200 years. The Japanese government has actually started to pay Japanese couples to have children.
One Italian journalist (an atheist by the way) noted that we live in a sick society, with couples who do everything possible initially to avoid pregnancy, and later on do everything to become pregnant. I have so many friends who decided not to marry or have children until they were in their late 30's and now have difficulty conceiving, and then a ton of money is spent on in vitro and other unethical methods of procuring children. You are right that high college loans and other things are a hindrance to forming a family, but our society hasn't been up in arms about this (where is the Occupy movement on this one). But I also see a lot of young people purchasing the latest gadgets and overspending, afraid to have children because indeed it is a life of sacrifice. When my first child was born, I knew my life was over (in a good way) and I would be living for my children. But life now with my wife and children is so much better, despite a great lack of free time, but who cares (the smiles of my children are the greatest reward). But people are selfish these days (that is why we have such a high divorce rate, which is devastating to children, with recent studies showing poorer grades and IQ test for children from divorced families) and every person I have ever talked to who had more than 2 siblings will tell you its the best way for kids to learn sharing and shed their selfish ways. And what is better for society, the pampered only kids in China who are a disaster waiting to happen or a society of people who think more about others than about themselves.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f39a6bb3f7780b000023Donna GratehouseThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:26:02 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f39a6bb3f7780b000023
NFP, while high maintenance and highly unreliable, is still a form of birth control. You are deliberately trying to avoid pregnancy if you use it. The Church is hypocritical to approve this one form of birth control while opposing all others.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f35769bedd5d3300002cJenThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:24:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f35769bedd5d3300002c
The one that always amazes me (not the first time I've heard this one) is that nowadays more people are having more carefree sex and doing so reduces women to objects. To espouse either of these beliefs you have to have the worst knowledge of history in... well, history. 1. People always had carefree sex; they just didn't talk about it. Infidelity has been rampant throughout history. The difference is that it used to be acceptable for men to sleep around outside of marriage so it wasn't considered bad per se. They're only really bothered by infidelity now because women do it but we can't stone them for it anymore. 2. Women have been objectified for the larger part of human history. These people act as though when women wore giant dresses that covered everything they weren't objectified. Even then, they were things owned by their fathers, ultimately traded to their husbands for some cows or money or whatever, and then served as breeding machines to propagate their husband's line and protect his property by ensuring an heir.
And the idea of "government coercion" in reproduction? Asinine. They obviously do not understand the definition of the word "coercion", which means to force or compel. Increasing reproductive choice adds *choices*; no one is forced to do anything, unlike before when forced motherhood was far more common.
And I LOVE the assertion that, because women can choose not to be pregnant, men choose not to commit. Oh no, marriage is now about love rather than two people forced together by a fate neither of them wanted! How terrible.
The Church can believe whatever it wants, but keep its religious beliefs out of my laws. How quickly people forget that our founders came here to *escape* religious persecution and the influence of religion in politics.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f2be69bedd522e000056InStatuViatorisThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:22:22 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f2be69bedd522e000056
If the Church were flexible and changed with circumstances according to societal or political influences, it would be denying all that makes the Church what it is. If it changed in fluctuation with societal norms, its laws would reflect the general degradation in morality we see everywhere around us, and the premise for an objective form of goodness would be completely abolished.
Even as a society, whether it is a generally Catholic populace or not, it would not be favorable for us to wish to dilute a force which yields only positive pressure: a Church that supports not killing, not stealing, honesty, patience. These are things that we wish to encounter in our business lives, in our society. If we were to be flexible on our definition of honesty, for instance, (one which the Church has starkly upheld for thousands of years) I would not have to deal with anybody around me in an honest way. What would hold me to being honest if the Church told me that God wouldn't punish me for being dishonest? If I make a profit from my dishonesty, and it makes me happy and rich and famous and secure (the important things in society today), how could it possibly be wrong?
Do you see where I'm coming from? If the Church wobbled and wavered on its laws and definitions, we would lose whatever trust we have in the objectivity of ANY of its dictates. If the Church changes its mind on something it has always stood for, who's to say the rest of its positions must remain solid?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f236eab8ead72100000dJames HarrisThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:20:06 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f236eab8ead72100000d
But aren't we also killing those people who make cures to cancer and other diseases? I am pretty sure that abortion and the pill are not the right way to go to regulate crime. It completely leaves it up to chance. Maybe we will get the next Hitler or maybe we will miss him and instead get the guy capable of stopping him. ;)
Also, I am pretty sure that most abortions occur "outside" of wedlock. So of course they would go hand in hand to some extent at least.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f15e69bedd5d3300000bJames HarrisThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:16:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f15e69bedd5d3300000b
NFP is actually a lot more surefire than the pill is.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f062ecad047c59000016Thomas ZabiegaThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:12:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33f062ecad047c59000016
You are right, but hopefully the rape victim will arrive in the ER as early as possible before conception occurs, and that is the only case where contraception is allowed in the Catholic Church (as the victim did not freely choose to have sexual relations). The rape protocol at Catholic hospitals is pretty complex and there is also a test for ovulation (as conception cannot obviously occur before ovulation). There are actual debates which rape protocol is ethical or not (there is a lot of freedom in debating certain specific issues in the Church, so there is no clear answer in difficult areas like this or a tubal pregnancy and what method can be used to treat it ethically). The point of the pregnancy test is to avoid harming the fetus as well with tons of toxic steroids.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33eec1ecad048d5700000ec hThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:05:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33eec1ecad048d5700000e
Your story is beautiful!
and I wish more people knew the whole of the Church's teaching on birth-control and NFP. and could believe, as my parents have, too, that, even though it won't be easy, if they trust in him, God will give them only what they can handle.
the best of luck to you and your wife!
the eldest of sevenhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ee34ecad047f57000006InStatuViatorisThu, 09 Feb 2012 11:03:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ee34ecad047f57000006
@lea - Sure, infidelity has always been a failure of mankind and of societies. Of course these things happened in America before the invention of the Pill. This was never denied.
However, you cannot deny the fact (and the statistics) that show how the Pill has ridiculously enabled an amplification in this infidelity, in the number of children born out of wedlock, and in the eventual break down in family lives. The mindset already existed, certainly, but the means for Olympic levels of infidelity were provided by the invention of contraception.
If a man is already stealing, is it then advisable to enable him further by providing for him a more effective way to steal? Either way, he's a thief. Either way, he's a menace to society and communities. However, with the more effective means, he will be able to steal more valuables, more often, and he willl never get caught.
And yes, I agree wholeheartedly with your final statement. Society's heart wasn't in the right place to begin with -- But we could have done without the wild increase to this chaos.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ec8a69bedd8d1d000060Barbara C.Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:55:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ec8a69bedd8d1d000060
Because only unplanned babies grow up to be criminals. Oh, no, I must have a criminal growing inside me right now. It's so great that we can tell who will be a criminal and who won't before they are born...um, yeah, must have missed them offering me the genetic test for that one.
Just because "crime" has dropped since Roe v. Wade that doesn't mean it dropped because of Roe v. Wade. As my sociology professor used to hammer into us "coincidence does not equal causation", and that research claiming causation has been questioned by others. Furthermore, I guess it's worth killing the innocent unborn who may have grown up to change the world in positive ways to make sure that any criminals aren't born.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ec5ceab8eac50900006eDawnThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:55:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ec5ceab8eac50900006e
"...Even then only if they have a negative pregnancy test, to avoid the contraception causing an abortion)."
That doesn't make any sense at all. Emergency Contraception must be taken within 72 hours of unprotected intercourse BEFORE implantation of a fertilized egg can occur (thus resulting in pregnancy...if the egg doesn't implant in the lining of the uterus, then pregnancy doesn't happen). Also, law enforcement generally says rapes must be investigated at the hospital within 72 hours of the incident so that evidence can be collected.
A pregnancy test will only show a positive result bare minimum 5-7 days before the expected menstrual cycle. Based on an average 14 day luteal phase when a woman is fertile (28 day cycle, approximately halfway though the cycle), even if the woman were to get pregnant from a rape, you're still looking at LEAST 7-10 days before she would have a positive pregnancy test and even then there's a good chance it would come up negative.
You see, it's impossible to have a positive pregnancy test at the hospital when she goes in for rape because there's about a 99.9% chance that pregnancy hasn't happened yet and won't happen for several days. That is why hospitals administer EC, to prevent a pregnancy from happening because of rape. Your claim that Catholic hospitals only provide EC upon a negative pregnancy is scientifically flawed. They do not provide it out guidance of the Church or the local Bishop, though some do. Women should know the Catholic hospitals in their area so they can be avoided in cases of rape so they won't be denied EC (if they want it, and most do).http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e82eeab8eac50900003bTamara2Thu, 09 Feb 2012 10:37:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e82eeab8eac50900003b
Here is another one that has never really studied the history of Judeo-Christianity. The Roman Catholic Church does not go back to the time of Christ. It goes back to the time of Roman Emperors Constantine and Justinian who actually created the Roman Catholic Church by hijacking what was then just an informal movement of people looking for truth, and through no fault of their own got stuck with the Roman version. As Linda Moulton Howe an award winning investigative journalist, would say: 99.999% of the people either don't have the time, the know how, or the desire to verify what's being shoved down their throats on a daily basis by the status quo. I was baptized Roman Catholic who went through 8 years of parochial school indoctrination and 4 years of high school Catholic instruction. If the Roman Catholic Church had had its way, Galileo would have been burned at the stake. Thank the Universe for the Medicis.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e719eab8ead509000028NFPThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:32:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e719eab8ead509000028
How to not have 13 kids: Natural Family Planning - more effective in avoiding pregnancy than artificial contraceptives, and also extremely effective in achieving pregnancy. A woman is really only fertile one or possibly two days a month. Knowing exactly when (this is not the rhythm method, see creighton method) avoids falling into sin by using contraceptives and allows a couple to have a responsible amount of children for their state in life. <a href="http://www.colsdioc.org/Offices/MarriageandFamilyLifeOffice/NaturalFamilyPlanning.aspx" target="_blank">http://www.colsdioc.org/Offices/MarriageandFamilyLifeOffice/NaturalFamilyPlanning.aspx</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e650eab8eab10900001fAmber DaleThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:29:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e650eab8eab10900001f
Mr. Blodget:
The Catholic Church does not say you need to have 13 children. There is a way to avoid pregnancy and still be in compliance with Church teaching. You can be abstinate or you can use Natural Family Planning. The Couple to Couple League offers classes on how to use NFP properly. If you use it properly, it works. And it doesn't require you to put chemicals into your body.
Blessings,
Amberhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e5beecad04724700000cGregThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:26:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e5beecad04724700000c
Henry,
Sorry Your Ignorant.
The Church objects to killing unborn children in the womb.
Most contraception is abortion.
But there is another way, approved by the Church that is over 99% effective in postponing pregnancy. It is called Natural Family Planning
The Couple to Couple League teach all about it.
<a href="http://www.ccli.org/nfp/" target="_blank">http://www.ccli.org/nfp/</a>
Most if not all Contraception is evil. It desecrates the marital bond, offends against chastity, and is a menace to public morals. It is reprehensible to engage in contraceptive acts or to cooperate in them in any way. This is a matter of natural law; it has nothing to do with religion. Public bodies should not be promoting or enabling this sin. Neither Holy Mother Church, nor any other group, religious or secular, nor any individual should be forced by government to divulge funds for such wicked purposes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e580eab8eac10900000aTamara SarkovskyThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:25:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e580eab8eac10900000a
And let's not forget, had the Catholic Church had its way, it would have burned Galileo, the father of modern science, at the stake. Thank the Universe for the Medici Family. (From a baptized Catholic who spent 8 years in parochial school and 4 years in high school catechism, thanks to the old man). Most Catholics have never taken the trouble to study the unwhite-washed version of the church's history, and that includes my 3 younger siblings; I have, and it's a sordid picture at best.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e484eab8eaa578000073AlyaThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:21:40 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e484eab8eaa578000073
I, too, know some very devout Christians who use birth control. They don't use it to be sex maniacs; they don't use it to amass a ton of wealth and be selfish. I doubt very much it's because the husband has reduced the wife to a sex object. They use it as part of how they view their responsibilities to each other and their family.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e3a3ecad04053d000034Mary GibsonThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:17:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e3a3ecad04053d000034
Easy: natural methods require sacrifice, namely abstinence and to have respect for each other, not to mention an increase of intimacy by finding other ways to enjoy each other's company for a few days a month. The artificial method is just popping a pill each day and doing whatever the hell you want, when you want it, no discipline at all. See the difference and why culturally it leads to the using of women (or men, too)?
I'm surprised honestly that all the hippie vegan types who are always yelling at us about the evils of high fructose corn syrup aren't all over this issue like flies on honey. Why do they love artificially tampering with their body's hormone levels and yet cry in outrage over use of hormones in dairy cows? Now *there's* a double-standard for you...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e215ecad042933000062mdmegThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:11:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e215ecad042933000062
I agree, what is the Church's stance when it comes to condoms and disease? I used to think that bc was my only option bc I wanted to get ahead in my career until I discovered NFP.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e1ccecad040539000050Mary GibsonThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:10:04 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e1ccecad040539000050
You are creating a false dichotomy. Just because a Catholic family doesn't want 13 children does not mean that they have to disobey the Church to do it.
The Church has ALWAYS allowed married couples to exercise the moral responsibility for determining if they should have another child, it is just that the Church's way requires a little something that this culture refuses to accept: discipline and abstinence. Don't want to get pregnant, women? Then don't have sex on the days when you might get pregnant: if your husband loves and respects you and your dignity as a woman he can WAIT a few days. The marital act is the most wonderful thing in the world, the funny thing is that it is only that old-fashioned Church that truly appreciates that fact. By popping the Pill women just let men off the hook and cheapen the whole experience, setting themselves up just to be dropped to the floor. There are exceptions, of course, with loving couples who don't have any notion of dropping the other person, but what we are discussing here is why the Church has been, for 2000 years, so adamant about all of this in principle (and don't forget, 2000 years ago a kind of "contraception" and abortion too were both practiced by the culture... the Church from the very beginning has been "counter cultural" in these matters and yet, here she is still!).
There's also an entirely different reason the Church is right. You want to improve your love life? I dare you: go with your spouse to learn how to do NFP (the modern kind that is even more "effective" in avoiding pregnancy than the PIll is, not the old rhythm method that truly is dated, from when science didn't know as much) and then just try it. I believe that every couple who uses NFP will themselves experience a much closer relationship and even (no way) BETTER SEX.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e0bd6bb3f77d6500002bLeaThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:05:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33e0bd6bb3f77d6500002b
I agree. That argument in particular doesn't hold up for maintaining the Church's stance on birth control. I just finished reading a biography about Coco Chanel--early 1900s. She was definitely with men who used women. She was born out of wedlock, on top of it, and was abandoned by a father who saw fit to go off and be with someone else after her mother died. Coco made her way into the higher ranks of society. It was a given among the upper crust in France, and traditionally in at least France and England, to fool around. This was all long before approval of birth control. Queen Victoria admonished the nobility of her day (pre-1900) to better moral standards because they had a tendency of sleeping around. How many European kings of the past had their women on the side? It's naive to think this is objectification of women (and vice versa) is something new--it's just more widespread. And started becoming so before the Pill.
It's easy to romanticize the past, but the reality is much different. Leonardo da Vinci was born of unwed parents. Mary Shelley was born of parents who had been anti-matrimonial, although did marry shortly before her birth. Shelley started an affair with the man she was to later marry. Brothels have been around since 4000 BC. I could go on and on. It is nothing new.
If society lowered its standards just because birth control became more widely available, it means its heart wasn't right to begin with.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dff86bb3f7725d000051ElizabethThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:02:16 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dff86bb3f7725d000051
I was recently a 20-something newlywed, and was not financially ready to welcome children yet. My husband and I used Natural Family Planning to avoid pregnancy for 3 years.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dfcd6bb3f76e5d00004bbyzcathwifeThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:01:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dfcd6bb3f76e5d00004b
I live in a Catholic 'bubble'- NONE of my friends use artificial birth control- I have 4 kids- I have one friend with 12, but the average family size is about 4- so yes, we are more than normal (by choice with our husbands through natural, non-chemical means) but an average of less than 5....just making up for all those rich people who are having even 1! ;)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dfc069bedda00b00002eLeticia VelasquezThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:01:20 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dfc069bedda00b00002e
Henry this was a well written article, the best I've seen from a secular source, however, it can't cover everything there is to know about the Catholic Church's position on human sexuality. The Church teaches that a couple may use natural means, not contraception, to space children when there are grave reasons. That means we can use scientific methods like Natural Family Planning (a sophisticated method using charting of a woman's symptoms of fertility which has proven to be 99% accurate).
Grave reasons means that if my health is threatened, my husband is jobless, we are overwhelmed by the number of children, one is medically fragile and requires an inordinate amount of time for care, etc. These are grave (serious) reasons to delay conception. Non serious reasons are: I want to buy a vacation home, fancy car, or I'm tired of mothering and want a career.
I have only three daughters, though I wanted more. Later marriage and infertility mean very few Catholics among those who are faithful to Church teaching are blessed with 13 children. If we were, there would not be a pending crisis with Social Security; there used to be 7 workers for each collector, now there are 3. We can't sustain our entitlements without more Americans working. This is the legacy left to American by Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dfaaecad042f3300005bKathleenThu, 09 Feb 2012 10:00:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dfaaecad042f3300005b
@HenryBlodgett, the Church is not a company or organization so it doesn't need to operate like one. I do appreciate that you as editor let an article like this get through. Thanks for disagreeing but still being open to real conversation!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33de6f6bb3f74f59000064AmandaThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:55:43 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33de6f6bb3f74f59000064
Ever heard of NFP? And 98% is grossly inacurrate. For one thing, nobody ever asked me. For another, the guttmacher institute forms that statistic by using anyone and everyone who called themselves Catholic and has EVER used bc of any kind. So I am in that statistic, even though I am a practicing Catholic who does not use birth control. And I know A LOT of women who are in the same boat. The media really needs to quit using this statistic...it's just wrong.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33de5deab8eab178000018ElizabethThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:55:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33de5deab8eab178000018
Nowhere does church policy state that every Catholic married couple must have 13 children. Artificial contraception is not the only way to avoid a pregnancy; when used correctly, Natural Family Planning (not NOT the rhythm method, but a reliable method utilizing observable fertility symptoms such as temperature) is found to be at least as effective as hormonal methods, without any of the undesirable side effects. The church leaves the number and spacing of our children completely up to us and our consciences.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ddd8eab8eaac78000008AmandaThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:53:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33ddd8eab8eaac78000008
If I were not a Catholic, and were looking for the true Church in the world today, I would look for the one Church which did not get along well with the world; in other words, I would look for the Church which the world hates. My reason for doing this would be, that if Christ is in any one of the churches of the world today, He must still be hated as He was when He was on earth in the flesh. If you would find Christ today, then find the Church that does not get along with the world. Look for the Church that is hated by the world, as Christ was hated by the world. Look for the Church which is accused of being behind the times, as Our Lord was accused of being ignorant and never having learned. Look for the Church which men sneer at as socially inferior, as they sneered at Our Lord because He came from Nazareth. Look for the Church which is accused of having a devil, as Our Lord was accused of being possessed by Beelzebub, the Prince of Devils. Look for the Church which the world rejects because it claims it is infallible, as Pilate rejected Christ because he called Himself the Truth. Look for the Church which amid the confusion of conflicting opinions, its members love as they love Christ, and respect its voice as the very voice of its Founder, and the suspicion will grow, that if the Church is unpopular with the spirit of the world, then it is unworldly, and if it is unworldly, it is other-worldly. Since it is other-worldly, it is infinitely loved and infinitely hated as was Christ Himself. ... the Catholic Church is the only Church existing today which goes back to the time of Christ. History is so very clear on this point, it is curious how many miss its obviousness..."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dd5c6bb3f7655d00004bPaulIIThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:51:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dd5c6bb3f7655d00004b
Henry
The Catholic Church is not at all compared to "organization or company" you fool, It's Christ's Church created by him in which is evident you do not belong nor believe in at all. But I have news for you, there will come a day when you will know this to be the truth, as will all of humanity. Question then will be, will it be too late for your own salvation. You are blinded from the truth.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dbad6bb3f74f5d000021CindyThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:43:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33dbad6bb3f74f5d000021
Mr. Blodget, the Catholic Church does not expect her members to have 13 children. Natural Family Planning is an effective and approved means to space or postpose pregnancy. Try reading what the Church really teaches about love, marriage and family. Read Pope Paul VI's Humane Vitae. Read Pope John Paul II's Theology of the Body. Also, please don't reduce the long-held beliefs of the Catholic Church to a "policy." Just because our societyin general has lowered its moral standards does not mean the Church must do so also. How many speeding tickets are issued on a daily basis? Should all speed limit laws be scrapped because the majority of the population ignores them? How many people drink or use drugs illegally? Should those laws also be scrapped? According to your logic, they should be. As stated in the article, contraception and abortion allow men and women to simply run away from their responsibilities.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d906eab8eaa46900002cGail FinkeThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:32:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d906eab8eaa46900002c
Not true. And following the fall of Rome, most of the Western world was Catholic for about 1500 years. All economic growth in that time came from Catholics. Since the division of Christendom, many things have influenced economic growth. It is too complicated to boil down to one factor.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d8c669bedd227900002fSteveSkojecThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:31:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d8c669bedd227900002f
So you're saying that your anecdotal experience concerning out-of-wedlock pregnancies trumps statistical fact? Convenient.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d6e9ecad04f72c00000bhkgonraThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:23:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d6e9ecad04f72c00000b
Take away welfare and food stamps and the population bubble corrects itself.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d610ecad04f82a000016Heather MThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:20:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d610ecad04f82a000016
The Church doesn't ask or expect that Catholic families have 13 children. Please see Church teaching on Responsible Parenthood. Every family is called to pray and discern their family size in regards to physical, social, financial and mental circumstances. This could be 1 child or it could be 16; there is no hard and fast rule. The Catholic Church only asks that families be open to life (thus, not contracepting). Natural Family Planning is 99% effective at planning and postponing pregnancies when needed - without any abortifacient or harmful side effects.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d4b0ecad04131f000028AmandaThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:14:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d4b0ecad04131f000028
I agree that the policy is impractical... when you don't know that the Catholic Church actually does have a plan in action. They may so no to contraception, but they say yes to Natural Family Planning (NFP)... and no, it's not the rhythm method. The Church doesn't advocate that everyone should have 13 children. The point is, women are only fertile for a short period of a few days each cycle, so it's very easy to avoid pregnancy if a couple decided they didn't want any more kids at that time. NFP is probably not what you think it is, so I would suggest looking more into it. It may surprise you.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d495ecad04f11e000055Brian TrainorThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:13:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d495ecad04f11e000055
The Church is in the business of the salvation of souls. It sees artificial contraception as a sin, thus is stands against it. And it makes the case through a 2000 year history (all other denominations were against contraception until the 1930s) and volumes of writings: Love and Responsibility, Theology of the Body, Humanae Vitae, etc. Also, the Church does sanction natural family planning to limit the number of children for grave reasons.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d34fecad04f520000031LiamThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:08:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d34fecad04f520000031
This was written by a heretical sect that was formerly Catholic and is currently under Interdict. You may do well to not heed its warning.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d26b69bedda965000040KatieThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:04:27 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d26b69bedda965000040
The Church should not have to change what it teaches based on what society dictates. If they say, "Whoops, sorry everyone, we were mistaken about contraception" then how can the members of the Church believe anything else the Church has taught for thousands of years? The teaching on contraception is upheld in the Church as a moral pillar. If the Church were to remove this pillar, they would be crumbling under the pressure of society instead of doing what they teach, which is to live as a light in the darkness. And this is coming from a fallen-away Catholic. I don't agree with many things about the Church, but I respect their right to maintain what they've been teaching for the entire span of their existence.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d250eab8eaeb57000056LiamThu, 09 Feb 2012 09:04:00 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d250eab8eaeb57000056
"But more importantly, the policy is just completely impractical. People don't want 13 kids these days. They can't afford 13 kids these days. And that's why 98% of Catholics ignore the policy.
The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company."
Look into the only "birth-control" allowed by the Catholic Church (other than abstinence), called Natural Family Planning. I know plenty of faithful Catholic couples who, by practicing NFP, are able to have a healthy sexual marriage within the parameters of the Catholic faith AND put off having kids until they're in a comfortable financial position. Along your argument, they also have the ability to stop having kids whenever it becomes financially irresponsible.
Also, couples who practice NFP experience a divorce rate of less than one quarter of a percent. That's astounding. Compare that to the overall divorce rate and it becomes clear that, despite its apparent rigidity and antiquity, the Church knows what it is talking about.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d23569bedd1f6d000015Jessica6Thu, 09 Feb 2012 09:03:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33d23569bedd1f6d000015
They also developed what is now the modern Corporation.
The Church was the first to come up with the corporation as Persona Fictae in order to pass Monastary properties down to the next generation of Monks.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33cae56bb3f7294500000bmoderndayabolitionistThu, 09 Feb 2012 08:32:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33cae56bb3f7294500000b
So, if my brother can't control his aim when shooting his gun, that's okay, he can keep shooting it because he likes to, even if he hurts people. Sorry to be a jerk on this, but just because your uncle likes sex does not mean he can try to repopulate his whole town and then excuse his behavior (or have you excuse his behavior) in the name of God or church - it doesn't work that way.
As God fearing people, we have to be responsible for our actions. Go forth and multiply is not the only command in the Bible. A little education goes a long way.
My parents used natural spacing. Granted, I had 6 siblings, but we worked on a farm, so it was planned that way. And we had all we needed. Note the statement, "all we needed". We did not have the latest and greatest crap that society told us we just had to have. I'd be willing to bet your uncle's family had a lot of unecessary items - cell phones, cable TV, computers, etc. The amount you make has less to do with your situation than the amount you spend. Again, if you can't afford kids, don't have them. If that means be sexually responsible, than you have to make that hard choice. It sucks, but you need to get rid of the entitlement mentality: "they were in an affluent society and they were dirt poor". They need to look to the Real Provider rather than compare themselves against those around them (same applies to you). If your uncle's family truly was a family, their bank account balance would mean less than their actual self-worth. This is created when family actually is family, instead of some strangers that say "Hi" every couple of days to each other.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c71869bedda04a000044TonyThu, 09 Feb 2012 08:16:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c71869bedda04a000044
Awesome piece! I'm surprised Henry would let you put this on the site :). Kudos to you (and yea, Henry too).
Cheers from Canada.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c6c36bb3f71d2d000054Liz GrierThu, 09 Feb 2012 08:14:43 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c6c36bb3f71d2d000054
Actually, NFP has been recognized by the UN as 99.6% effective - MORE EFFECTIVE THAN ANY BIRTH CONTROL OUT THERE, PERIOD. It was tested not only by the WHO, but also by the British Medical Journal, which stated in its findings that it had set out to discredit NFP. Catholic nuns were the teacher. What business do abstinent nuns have teaching a natural "birth control" method? Every woman, sexually active, regular, healthy or with a challenge to her cycle or fertility - EVERY WOMAN has objective, exteriorly observable signs of body temperature, cervical mucus and cervix position that indicate periods of fertility(4-6 days in a cycle) and infertility(all the other days!). They used these to teach the poorest of the poor(not just "American poor"), (objectively speaking) uneducated Hindus and Muslim couples on NFP. The pregnancy rate in this study group of over 1800 couples was .004%. NO CONTRACEPTIVE CAN CLAIM TO BE AS EFFECTIVE, PERIOD. NFP has no negative side effects, is not an abortifacient, can be used to achieve as well as indefinitely postpone the blessing of pregnancy, and is virtually impossible to practice outside of marriage. Maybe that last reason is why it's not catching on - if you don't respect the sanctity of marriage and the procreative beauty of the conjugal act, it is repellant. If you respect these, it is attractive and even sexy - when you can say "No" because you love someone, your "Yes" means more. One last point: Fertility is a HEALTHY condition. When did it become a "disease" to be "treated" with "medicine"? 96% of conditions treated with birth control are NOT ACTUALLY CURED by it - they are merely masking the SYMPTOMS. NFP can help identify and actually solve the health issues underlying endometriosis, irregular cycles, and other womens' health issues. Birth control? We already had a 100% effective method of birth control before the pill...it was called abstinence. "Birth Control" should be called "Self-control avoidance."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c67869bedd8154000022W BrooksThu, 09 Feb 2012 08:13:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c67869bedd8154000022
Let's Not Miss the Main Point. I am not Catholic and I do not agree with their stance on birth control. However, that is not really the issue at hand (although it is a good topic to discuss). The real issue is should the government require that all health insurance plans cover birth control, abortion services and other services that directly contradict an organization's moral values. And I believe the general answer is an emphatic NO. Now, I understand that freedom of religion is not a blanket covering for doing whatever we want. There are certain unalienable rights that should not be broken under the banner of religious freedom. Certain religious people might feel that beating your wife or honor killings are ok. But these violate the unalienable rights that are government should protect. But in no way is health insurance an unalienable right. And it should be absolutely intolerable that the government would REQUIRE health coverage for things like contraceptives and abortion services. Just because a society thinks something is good should not make it an unalienable right that is IMPOSED on everyone.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c2c66bb3f71939000005But!Thu, 09 Feb 2012 07:57:42 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c2c66bb3f71939000005
But it's based on a text that was written a long time ago!1!! Ideas that endure the longest are obviously invalid.
By the way I learned the above argument in college. Dozens of my college friends use it, so it must be right. I'll use the "Bible is 2000 years old" argument to battle evil christians forevers.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c18f69bedd0d52000004JDThu, 09 Feb 2012 07:52:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33c18f69bedd0d52000004
"And that if abortion laws are repealed that 15 years later crime will again go on the upswing."
You cannot logically assume that outcome. Programs in place could keep the crime rate lower than 15 years ago. I'm not saying that I know either! You could be right! But you cannot assume that.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33bdde6bb3f71d2d00001dJoAnna WahlundThu, 09 Feb 2012 07:36:46 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33bdde6bb3f71d2d00001d
The Catholic Church will never "be flexible and change with the circumstances" when it comes to moral doctrine. Moral truth doesn't change. If it did, that would make it subjective opinion, not objective truth.
I don't use contraception *haven't for over 8 years) and I have 4 kids, not 13. The Church does not teach that couples have to have as many kids as they can possibly reproduce; on the contrary, she teaches that couples must be prudent and responsible when it comes to parenthood while remaining open to the possibility of life. However, She also teaches that any means used to space pregnancy must be moral, and contraception is immoral. We use NFP to space our family, and it has the added benefit of not pumping any carcinogenic hormones into my body or the environment.
Moreover, I know several couples who have 8+ kids, by choice, and they make it work just fine. They have less of a carbon footprint than a modern family of four because frugality compels them to reduce, reuse, and recycle.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33bbd56bb3f7192900001cralphfyoungThu, 09 Feb 2012 07:28:05 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33bbd56bb3f7192900001c
There's a lot more to NFP than handling standard cycles - basal body temperature, the cervical mucus, etc. are all taken into account. It works very well if you're consistent with charting.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33b1deeab8eadb2500000bblourfThu, 09 Feb 2012 06:45:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33b1deeab8eadb2500000b
No non surgical birth control is a 100% safe anyway.
Besides the existence of birth control isnt the issue here. The problem is that moral as it was understood in the past is not part of most people's education anymore.
you wont be able to stop people from having sex all over the place with anyone willing just by forbidding birth control. educate young generations to make responsible decisions.
The lets enjoy life by all means possible attitude in most countries is leading societies into a crap future. but as long as drugs and alcohol are widespread available to help people 'cure' themselves temporarily, only half the number of affected individuals will care enough to do sth about it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f339ca3ecad041f3d000032like-mindThu, 09 Feb 2012 05:14:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f339ca3ecad041f3d000032
The article's thesis is flawed, for I remember pre-Pill, and the 1950's/early-1960's Male of the Species were living it up, screwing every lady available and they certainly weren't marrying them when they got pregnant. And that guff about trending toward objectification by the Males? Is this guy/and the Pope kidding? 'How to Marry a Millionaire' was pre-Pill. The Pill allowed the Other Half of the Species to join the merriment, but the Frowning Fathers couldn't care less. It all boils down to Blaming Eve.
The era this article hearkens back to is pre-WWII, and back then families were cemented together to avoid creating a 'broken home', but at the cost of Wifey having no escape from physical /psychological abusive relationship, so, uh, not exactly a really cool time to wish we were back at.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f338ca2eab8eaa64d000017ToffyThu, 09 Feb 2012 04:06:42 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f338ca2eab8eaa64d000017
Clearly you have little knowledge of NFP and its effectiveness. I know of several couples who have been practicing NFP for year and it has worked to a tee. It leaves the couple open to accepting life and if they can't afford to have 13 kids then they won't.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33833269bedd5b3100001aJohn J. JakubczykThu, 09 Feb 2012 03:26:26 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33833269bedd5b3100001a
To those who do not understand the Church's teaching on matters of this nature, the conversation must seem a little daunting. But lets look at it practically. If you are not growing, you are dying. And the truth is that for those of you more concerned with economics than other issues, you should encourage growth as it creates both natural and intellectual opportunities for the building of a culture. When families have children, there is a need for schhols. These children grow up and buy homes. They require cars and assorted personal items. they also pay into the social security system. finally they push your gurney when you are old. Now these people can also add to the intellectual growth of a nation. so I would suggest that aside from the moral considerations, there are some very practical aspects to all of this. For an interesting perspective , go to <a href="http://overpopulationisamyth.com/" target="_blank">http://overpopulationisamyth.com/</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f338161eab8ea3e35000036PhloontThu, 09 Feb 2012 03:18:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f338161eab8ea3e35000036
I think in that last sentence you meant to say a 'geocentric theory'. And by the way, the originator of the heliocentric theory of the solar system was named Copernicus. He was a Catholic. He was also a priest.
As for the HHS mandate, it would require Catholic institutions to participate in something that the Church has always taught was intrinsically evil. This would be government-mandated material cooperation in an act that is intrinsically evil, and it would also be a direct violation of the Church's religious freedom, something that is unprecedented in this country. Your argument might have some merit if the Catholic hospitals and universities forced people to work for them or if it was impossible for their employees to pay for their abortions, sterilizations, and contraception except through their employers.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337fc1ecad044509000021John J. JakubczykThu, 09 Feb 2012 03:11:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337fc1ecad044509000021
check it out. You will find it most interesting.
<a href="http://overpopulationisamyth.com/" target="_blank">http://overpopulationisamyth.com/</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337d886bb3f7972000003cPhloontThu, 09 Feb 2012 03:02:16 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337d886bb3f7972000003c
Let's kill children to reduce the crime rate, badbob. Great idea.
Crime is primarily an activity of young adults, not the poor. Since Roe v. Wade, the average age of this country has significantly increased, and the crime rate has proportionally reduced. And crime is also an activity of people from broken homes, whose numbers have skyrocketed since the time of Roe v. Wade, for predictable reasons. Violent crime rates spiked in the 1970s, after Roe v. Wade, but before the average age of adults increased. Poverty rates at this time remained stagnant.
Do you have any evidence that abortion leads to a reduction in crime or do you just take it on faith?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3379db69beddea2e00001dPhloontThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:46:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3379db69beddea2e00001d
Catholics invented capitalism, as any student of history knows from studying Venice and Genoa, the greatest trading and financial centers of the Renaissance. Catholic opposition to slavery was crucial in creating an entirely new economy that replaced the slavery-based economy of ancient Rome. Catholic religious orders, such as the Benedictines, were the most productive and profitable businesses of the Middle Ages because of their profit-driven efficiency. Max Weber was a fool.
To claim that Catholicism has opposed the profit motive or has historically opposed economic development is preposterous. The problem with the PIGS countries is that they are European, not that they are Catholic. All Europe is hurting economically due to cultural and demographic decline, not popish backwardness. The countries of Latin America, especially Brazil and Argentina, are doing far better economically than the Protestant countries of Europe and this Protestant country.
Yes, artful dodger, you have indeed made your point, but it is a point with a narrow historical view.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33780769beddd21b000060Big SisThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:38:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33780769beddd21b000060
Actually, it can.
There are ways to follow even an irregular cycle. The same symptoms appear throughout the cycle and can be monitored, it may just take more work. And NFP will actually help you learn how to follow your cycle.
I also have an irregular cycle. Mine tends to fluctuate between three and five weeks. It's been starting to smooth out now though. A woman's cycle also is prone to be irregular until she hits her mid to late twenties. It's very common for that to happen.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337702ecad04ef7100003eBig SisThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:34:26 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337702ecad04ef7100003e
That's good of you to do that for her.
And true it may take away some of the spontaneity, but it works even more effectively than the pill does.
I just get upset when people praise the pill as a "cure all" for women's health. It acts more like a band aid than fixing the actual problems women have with their cycles.
I don't condemn my friends that do use the pill, especially if they are not Catholic, I understand why some girls choose to use it. I will not be one of them.
I have a problem when the government decides it has to step on the moral obligations of Catholic organizations, or any other institution that does not believe in using contraception, and force them to provide a service that they do not approve of. Contraception is still available, albeit not free or extremely cheap, but it is still available.
And I agree with you, waiting until you can support the child is definitely important and should be the concern of every responsible parent.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337687eab8ea771d000048soy catolicaThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:32:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337687eab8ea771d000048
Um...NFP doesn't work for those of us who don't have normal cycles, so, hello pregnancy!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3375ab69bedd2a3100000fTony LayneThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:28:43 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3375ab69bedd2a3100000f
Yes, the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years. But nothing in your argument logically follows from that statement of the obvious. Plenty of people? Yes, but most Western countries' birth rates — including ours — have dropped below replenishment level even as average lifespan has gone up, which means that over the next forty to fifty years there will be relatively few workers supporting more and more elderly people even when Social Security and Medicare finally run dry. Furthermore, most population scenarios take for granted that the worldwide economy will never collapse ... which right now isn't a given.
As for the 98% number — that's a common misread. In fact, only 77% of Catholic women currently use contraceptives; the 98% refers to women who have ever used. (Source: same as the "98%" ... the Guttmacher Institute.) More Catholics, especially recent converts, are starting to move away from artificial contraceptives and towards NFP, which requires a lot more work and thought but which has gotten results close to "the Pill" ... without the minor disadvantages of increased risks of heart disease, stroke and breast cancer.
There are disciplinary practices the Church can (and has) changed over time. But to suggest that right and wrong should change just because the clock has moved a little bit .... The world may have changed, but the essential human condition hasn't; we're still the same broken half-animal, half-angel creature we were when Augustus ruled Rome.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337470ecad04ef71000026t0zterstr00delThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:23:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337470ecad04ef71000026
Hate to point this out but...emergency contraception will not interfere with an implanted pregnancy, so what's the point of the pregnancy test?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337395ecad04f471000028Birth control helps the economy Thu, 09 Feb 2012 02:19:49 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337395ecad04f471000028
Actually, I'm engaged to a catholic, and we've had that discussion...I'm willing to go along with NFP b/c I love her, but I also have some misgivings about it because of timing issues, and it takes away some of the spontaneity. My sister, who converted to catholicism as a young adult, has discussed NFP, so I'm aware of what you talked about.
My whole point is that it's okay for couples to use birth control (whatever method they choose), and that waiting to have kids makes it more likely that they'll be able to raise a family in a financially stable environment. It's not a guarantee, but it's better than just rolling the dice. I get your point though.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337286eab8ea671d00001eABizThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:15:18 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f337286eab8ea671d00001e
@Mr Blodget:
Condoms and chemical contraception are not the only way no to have children, that's the point! There are natural, reliable methods to know when a woman is or is not fertile, and thus decide whether it is a good idea or not to have sex at this time. The main difference is thus that condoms and chemical contraception allow you to have sex whenever you want with whoever you want (and who wants obviously!) without even thinking of what you are doing and its potential implications. This is what the Church disagrees with, as far as I know. Not to mention that contraception is also abortive most of the time, but that's another debate :)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f336fdb6bb3f7a81a00000dBig SisThu, 09 Feb 2012 02:03:55 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f336fdb6bb3f7a81a00000d
Not all Catholic couples have children right after marriage.
My fiance and I (both Catholic) plan on waiting until we are more financially stable before we have kids. My Aunt and Uncle didn't have their first until the end of their second year of marriage. They now have three kids, all of them spaced almost exactly two years apart and that's using NFP.
I personally come from a Catholic family of six, and we only ran into financial trouble when my Dad was injured in a car accident and couldn't work for a year and a half. Even then though we were never close to losing our house, we were all able to keep doing our regular activities and we always had food on the table. All of that was possible because my parents knew how to handle their money and we never had to go on food stamps. I know plenty of other families that have even more kids than my family and they are all just as financially sound as mine, if not more so. On the other hand, I know another family that has lost their house and can only rent because their credit is bad and they only have one kid.
I have no problem with people wanting fewer kids. I may be Catholic, but that doesn't mean I want a family of twelve, and not all Catholics wants that. I still would like at least four, but I will only bring children into this world if I can support them.
Birth control has several side effects and they are not exactly pleasant. Due to some severe health issues, I had to go on the Pill for a few months to try and regulate everything, my hormone levels flatlined and I went into a severe depression. The pill did nothing for my condition at all.
Natural Family Planning (NFP) is a good alternative to the pill because it works with a woman's natural cycle to find the times when she is most and least fertile. There are several different methods to use, including the Creighton Model. It's much healthier for a woman to work with her natural cycle than to put chemicals into her body to avoid a pregnancy. NFP takes more work and requires a little sacrifice whereas the pill is just an "easy button" fix.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f336cbdecad040172000009Art VandelayThu, 09 Feb 2012 01:50:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f336cbdecad040172000009
Add a comment...@DeDe: Everyone has the ability to control their own bodies, however it does require ones legs to stay together. If that's too absurd to countenance, I must be Superman.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3369a56bb3f7be12000013Grow UpThu, 09 Feb 2012 01:37:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3369a56bb3f7be12000013
god = imaginary friend
religion = method to control populace
church = group of people who share a common delusionhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f336957eab8eab91400000dAndrewRThu, 09 Feb 2012 01:36:07 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f336957eab8eab91400000d
it's not just an organization that governs the way Catholics should act...these things are not subject to change, what is being taught by the catholic church is validated by divine inspiration and based off of sacred scripture. Would birth control be more convenient to some people? yes. But thats not what the sexual act is about, it's meant to be PROCREATION, when man and woman meet in an act of union and out of their love, agree to form a family together. That is the primary means of marriage and of sex in general, our bodies are not tools for pleasure. The sexual revolution has clouded the inherent value of the human by reducing us to pleasure-seaking, animalistic creatures. In short, this not a mere policy, nor is the Catholic Church an organization or a business, It's the word of God.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3368fe69bedd0f1200001fAdam ZunigaThu, 09 Feb 2012 01:34:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3368fe69bedd0f1200001f
Dear Henry,
Don't worry, this isn't hate mail. I'm not going to argue for or against the 9 billion population theory, because I'm not a statistical analyst, and I can't predict the future. What I can share is the fact that I come from a Catholic family that practices and preaches natural family planning. Now before you assume anything, please let me share with you the fact that I have a brother with one child, and brothers and sisters with two, three, eight children, and a brother and a sister with eleven children each. We are all very open with our belief, and we have all chosen to have the number of children that we have in our households. None of us are struggling financially, even though we were raised by parents that started with nothing.
My wife and I lived together for five years before marrying, and during those five years we struggled as a couple. My wife was on birth control, and I found myself putting more demands on her keeping her body perfect, while I ran around town. I WAS NOT practicing my church's teachings. I realized I couldn't find the happiness I was looking for and took a leap of faith. We married, started practicing natural family planning, and I found the love I longed for.
I don't know how many children we may have. We are open for the first two, but due to my wife being on birth control for so long, it created medical problems that is currently hindering our efforts.
I'm not going to tell anyone what they must believe, but only share the goodness of what I have seen in my life with parents that gave all of themselves so their children could live a good life, and prosper. Having contributed a President of a major helicopter manufacturing company, a priest, a nun, a teacher, an FBI agent, military officers, a chef, an artist, a writer, and so many other great citizens stemming from their children and grandchildren, my 97 year old father and 91 year old mother did a fantastic job raising 13 children and teaching us great virtue.
I hole this letter finds you in good health and with an open heart.
Sincerely,
Adam Zuniga
Child #13http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3368b36bb3f79812000016Patrick HoelscherThu, 09 Feb 2012 01:33:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3368b36bb3f79812000016
Then don't have sex if you don't want 13 kids. Or at least wait until the time in your wife's cycle when she's naturally infertile. You act as if you cannot possibly not have sex. I have faith in you, I know you can do it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335e576bb3f7e60100000dCheyenne BlackfordThu, 09 Feb 2012 00:49:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335e576bb3f7e60100000d
I think acceptance of NFP is a logical inconsistency. If the requirement is that couples be open to childbirth (which it is), NFP is relatively effective (also, which it is), then how is NFP morally acceptable? No, it's not artificial, unlike condoms. Although the means are different, the end is the same (preventing childbirth). It's a form of birth control, LOL.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335ce1ecad04725500000eAnd just how did birth control lead to unstable households?Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:42:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335ce1ecad04725500000e
It's a logical fallacy to, without proof, draw a cause and effect connection between two things.
Birth control has actually worked for most couples, and it's not just promiscuous people that use it. I have several relatives, who are married and very pentecostal, but use birth control.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335ca169bedda677000019YIMCatholicThu, 09 Feb 2012 00:41:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335ca169bedda677000019
For those who want to send a message right.in.the.White.House.living.room, here’s the way. Sign this==>>(<a href="http://wh.gov/kl3" target="_blank">http://wh.gov/kl3</a>)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335b09eab8ea6169000041Birth control helps the economy Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:35:05 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335b09eab8ea6169000041
Prove it. Where are his/her facts, figures, and logic to back that up?
Look at the price of gas and other resources and commodities....do you really think having more people would solve everything? There would be even more market saturation and food and water problems.
I'm all for reforming our tax system (FairTax all the way), but many of our economic problems aren't b/c of taxes or the chid birth rate. Go ask someone in India if having more kids is the answer to everything.
Also, as I asked originally, what's wrong with a couple waiting until they're financially ready to have kids? Tell me how that doesn't help the economy....if they're on more stable financial footing, the less likely it is that they have to go to the government for help. Also, having fewer kids is the only practical choice for most people....look at all the married couples and single parents struggling just to raise one or two...their problems would be exponentially worse if they had a lot of kids.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335871eab8ea616900002bPhilthy McNastyThu, 09 Feb 2012 00:24:01 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335871eab8ea616900002b
The earth can sustain lots more people than right now. The problem is that we don't know how to let everyone use the earths resources. 20% of the world uses 80% of the wealth. Several Million people live on less than a dollar a day.
I'll agree that a lot of people don't want several children, but some can still afford it. They would just rather not use their money on another child. And regardless of their reason for not wanting children it's still a law in the Catholic Church to not use contraceptives.
The Church has changed over the years, but this is one thing they don't need to change. Marriage and sex aren't things that should be thrown around nonchalantly. Like the article said, it materializes women and lowers moral standards. Also, contraceptives don't always work. Then you get the unplanned baby, which could end up being aborted, put up for adoption, or have a single parent. It isn't just a law that they made up to prevent people from having fun. It has reason behind it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335836ecad043643000027What about the Spanish Inquisition and the whole abuse and cover up thing?Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:23:02 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f335836ecad043643000027
To avoid confusion: This was a reply to someone else's post, and I posted here by mistake. So I also posted this reply therehttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3357c56bb3f7516a000031What about the Spanish Inquisition and the whole abuse and cover up thing?Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:21:09 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3357c56bb3f7516a000031
First of all, what logic/line of reasoning leads you to conclude that the problem was that they were gay? You're making a logically fallacious assumption that being gay will make someone more culpable to being a predator....Didn't you ever watch "To Catch A Predator?...almost all the predators on there were straight guys going after young girls....so using you're reasoning that 'they are simply homosexual' in regards to abuse in the Catholic church, you have to apply the same thing here and say the abuse towards young girls in the protestant church was simply that they preyed on them b/c they are heterosexual. Those priests could either be gay, straight, or something in between (bi)....the real crux of it is that they used their position of power over them to commit these atrocious acts. Just look at Jerry Sandusky at Penn St.....it had nothing to do with him being gay or straight, and everything to do with abusing, figuratively and literally, his position of power.
Your proposal is that they don't allow gays in the clergy...how exactly do they do that? Is there a 'gay test'? And how many of those priests knew themselves they were like that when they entered the ministry? Once they lie to themselves, it's pretty easy to convince the church that they're fit to be clergy. In my own long-winded way here, my point is that the problem isn't that they're gay, it's because they're sick people, and straight people are no less prone to doing to the same crap.
In regards to your Spanish Inquisition argument, I believe you're referring to "The Brutal Truth".. I'm not protestant or catholic, and the protestants aren't any better, but the Catholic church tends to be more sensitive to criticism than the others. Also, the fact still remains the church was the main facilitator in the torture and imprisonment of so-called heretics. My original point on here was that the Catholic church is not exactly a moral standard-bearer...there is blood on their hands.
You seem to defend the fact they put people on trial for their faith/lack of it.
Also, I mentioned Martin Luther in my first post....He challenged the Catholic church on Indulgences. It's one of several examples in which the church was very sensitive to criticism, and he was excommunicated for challenging them.
"LMS" was trying to paint a rosy, perfect picture of the Catholic church, and I was merely pointing out a few of the many examples of were the church is very flawed.
My opinion is that organized religion does great harm to society when it tries to assert it's beliefs onto everyone else....look at Uganda, where they are again trying to implement the death penalty for being gay...that was completely motivated by religion, in this case US evangelical groups.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33579f6bb3f74f6a00008aWhat about the Spanish Inquisition and the whole abuse and cover up thing?Thu, 09 Feb 2012 00:20:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33579f6bb3f74f6a00008a
First of all, what logic/line of reasoning leads you to conclude that the problem was that they were gay? You're making a logically fallacious assumption that being gay will make someone more culpable to being a predator....Didn't you ever watch "To Catch A Predator?...almost all the predators on there were straight guys going after young girls....so using you're reasoning that 'they are simply homosexual' in regards to abuse in the Catholic church, you have to apply the same thing here and say the abuse towards young girls in the protestant church was simply that they preyed on them b/c they are heterosexual. Those priests could either be gay, straight, or something in between (bi)....the real crux of it is that they used their position of power over them to commit these atrocious acts. Just look at Jerry Sandusky at Penn St.....it had nothing to do with him being gay or straight, and everything to do with abusing, figuratively and literally, his position of power.
Your proposal is that they don't allow gays in the clergy...how exactly do they do that? Is there a 'gay test'? And how many of those priests knew themselves they were like that when they entered the ministry? Once they lie to themselves, it's pretty easy to convince the church that they're fit to be clergy. In my own long-winded way here, my point is that the problem isn't that they're gay, it's because they're sick people, and straight people are no less prone to doing to the same crap.
In regards to your Spanish Inquisition argument, I believe you're referring to "The Brutal Truth".. I'm not protestant or catholic, and the protestants aren't any better, but the Catholic church tends to be more sensitive to criticism than the others. Also, the fact still remains the church was the main facilitator in the torture and imprisonment of so-called heretics. My original point on here was that the Catholic church is not exactly a moral standard-bearer...there is blood on their hands.
You seem to defend the fact they put people on trial for their faith/lack of it.
Also, I mentioned Martin Luther in my first post....He challenged the Catholic church on Indulgences. It's one of several examples in which the church was very sensitive to criticism, and he was excommunicated for challenging them.
"LMS" was trying to paint a rosy, perfect picture of the Catholic church, and I was merely pointing out a few of the many examples of were the church is very flawed.
My opinion is that organized religion does great harm to society when it tries to assert it's beliefs onto everyone else....look at Uganda, where they are again trying to implement the death penalty for being gay...that was completely motivated by religion, in this case US evangelical groups.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33525b69bedd146200001bSusanWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:58:03 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33525b69bedd146200001b
I still believe there is an unproven-as-yet link between breast cancer and birth control pills. And I fear any scientific research showing this would be dismissed by feminists and men (who benefit from birth control pills with absolutely no chance of side effects - except STD's that is). <a href="http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2010/09/the_pillbreast_cancer_connection.html" target="_blank">http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2010/09/the_pillbreast_cancer_connection.html</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334f7b69bedde54a000057MatthewJLBWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:45:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334f7b69bedde54a000057
Mr. Blodget,
Do you seriously believe that 98% figure? Just stop for a second. Does it make logical sense that such an overwhelming majority of Catholics don't believe their own Church? Because, the real source of that statistic is the Guttmacher Institute, which is named after a former president of Planned Parenthood: <a href="http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2011/04/13/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.guttmacher.org/media/nr/2011/04/13/index.html</a>
It is just a left-wing talking point that they want to spread far and wide in order it for it to be treated as truth.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334aa869bedd984d000012I missed the value in change...Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:25:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334aa869bedd984d000012
The Church needs to change like any company? Companies change to stay in business, and though I'd never call the Church a business, as so well noted in the article, its the longest standing "organization" in the western world. Maybe more businesses should be like the Church, not the other way around!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334a3c6bb3f7d457000010Lisa SwanWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:23:24 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334a3c6bb3f7d457000010
Henry, it's pretty simple to limit family size and not use birth control (I hate that term, by the way.) God gave women a cycle with natural times of fertility and infertility. Any woman can take the classes to learn this, and with abstaining 6-8 days/month a couple can work with God to regulate family size when there is reason to do so. It doesn't matter how many Catholic's ignore the policy. Who ever said the majority rules in religion? That's what all the other religions are for--not so in Catholicism (luckily for the apparent 2% of us who truly embrace and realize the beauty of it!)http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3349fbeab8ea4f55000015Thomas ZabiegaWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:22:19 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3349fbeab8ea4f55000015
Not true, recently the head of one of the largest banks in Italy stated that if couples in the U.S. and Europe had on average 3 instead of the less than 2 children per couple that is the norm in the West, all the financial problems that have occurred in recent years would have never happened. Children have been good for the economy in the past and now. The problem now is governments that impose heavy tax burdens on families and businesses that take advantage of them for profit. Also, people are living way beyond their means.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3348786bb3f7ba57000007Thomas ZabiegaWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:15:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3348786bb3f7ba57000007
Just a comment on some of your opinions. First, the rate of pedophilia among priests was 1.7%, vs. 10% among Protestant clergy. Second, 84% of the abused children were over 13, which means the priest were ephebophiles or simply homosexuals, just like the guy who dreams of sleeping with his teenage daughter's friend like in that filthy Academy Award winning movie a few years back. So the problem is that the Church didn't stick to its teachings and admited homosexuals into the seminaries, which it has stopped doing now. In regards to the Spanish Inquisition, there is a BBC documentary several years back that shows the Protestants burned way more Catholics than the Inquisition did. In fact the amount of people killed by the Spanish Inquisition in its 400 years of existence was just over 300. It was the most objective court in Europe at its time, as those who were accused were asked to write down a list of their enemies and these enemies could not be used as witnesses against the accused, and some people actually blasphemed purposely so they could be moved from the filthy secular Spanish prisons to the much more humanly run Inquisition prisons.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33468669bedd5d4b000001Thomas ZabiegaWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:07:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33468669bedd5d4b000001
Thanks to contraception we live in a perverted society. As Cardinal Biffi said: we went from a family of two parents and four kids to one kid and four parents. I thought this strange until a patient of mine (I am a physician) came in the next day complaining that her 4 year old was kicking her. She had the kid with a guy who then dumped her and is living with another woman, while she is living with her new boyfriend. Yep, one child and four parents, and you wonder why the kid is kicking her. So you don't have to go to Colombia, thanks to birth control (I have another patient with 5 kids, all conceive when she was on the pill) we have the same situation with unwed, impoverished moms here in the U.S.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33455decad04ff1f000049Thomas ZabiegaWed, 08 Feb 2012 23:02:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33455decad04ff1f000049
Not true. A recent commentary in USA Today stated that though 28 states have such a mandate, they all have exemptions through which Catholic hospitals do not have to comply. And unless a Catholic hospital is simply breaking the rules of the Church and its local bishop, they do not provide contraception except in the case of rape (and even then only if they have a negative pregnancy test, to avoid the contraception causing an abortion).http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33452469bedd7d4000002aWhat about the Spanish Inquisition and the whole abuse and cover up thing?Wed, 08 Feb 2012 23:01:40 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33452469bedd7d4000002a
The Catholic church is not exactly a bastion of morality. Back in the day they tortured people into conversion, were complicit in several dictatorial regimes throughout the world, and have a history of anti semitism.
Then of course a few years it was revealed that priests at all levels had been abusing young boys, and their superiors covered it up, at times threatening to excommunicate the boys and their families if they went public with it.
I will give you this much....the church has given us beautiful music and art in the past, and can provide comfort to those who are otherwise hopeless about life. But so do other religions and churches.
But to praise them for 'staying firmly rooted in their teaching' isn't good reasoning....using that reasoning, the church of Islam must be praised for not bowing to political pressures and making sure that women know their role. And the Westboro Baptist Church crowd are merely 'staying grounded' in the Biblical sense that being gay warrants the death penalty....just ask Uganda about Christian influence on that issue.
The Catholic church also a long time ago sold Indulgences, wherein a person could essentially buy their way to heaven....so you can't really claim that they have held steadily to their beliefs....I'm guessing that back in the day you would have hated Martin Luther for daring to go against the church's 'firmly rooted teachings'.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334199eab8eaf04200001fironiccatholicWed, 08 Feb 2012 22:46:33 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f334199eab8eaf04200001f
Thanks for the charitable assessment. But I think the article is right on, and your concerns misguided. But I'll stick to one, which undergirds the others--Catholics practicing natural family planning (NFP) simply don't have 13 kids unless they choose to. It's as effective as The Pill when properly employed, free!, and actually has the benefit of helping women and men understand their fertility better (most fertility specialists recommend couples adopt NFP as a first course in getting pregnant--so you know when you are fertile. Goes both ways, NFP) . But it gets slammed repeatedly as being what it is not, and others assume it doesn't work but the Big Pharma moneymakers love their profits and say "you need the drug" over and over, and most men seem to prefer absolutely unlimited sexual contact (see #3 above in the article).
It's not a company, so the Church ain't gonna change, exactly. I do think it would adjust matters of discipline (practical life that is) if the argument were there for it. It isn't there, in this case.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33400aeab8ea843e000060anokaWed, 08 Feb 2012 22:39:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33400aeab8ea843e000060
"given that more than half of all pregnancies are unplanned, it stands to reason that artificial contraception isn't bulletproof either."
Speaking of ridiculous, your "given" is false as well as the premise for your "reason[ed]" conclusion but, what's a little hyperbole to a "Former CU Writer."http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333f1369bedd5f3600001e13Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:35:47 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333f1369bedd5f3600001e
The higher virtue is chastity. You can't serve two lovers with "all your heart." Common sense. True love demands attention. You're not cheating on the side. So the ideal of Catholicism is total devotion to God, not having 13 hungry kids who want attention too. There's nothing wrong with having 13 kids, but it's not the Catholic ideal. Jesus is the model, "the way, the truth and the life." Whether or not you believe he died a virgin, that's what Catholics believe. Obviously chastity is challenging and hard to imagine but not impossible. I'm no expert on the subject but you figure seclusion and diet are part of the equation--Google it. Purity, what a concept. LOL.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333e28eab8eafd42000007Meaningless sexWed, 08 Feb 2012 22:31:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333e28eab8eafd42000007
The higher virtue is chastity. You can't serve two lovers with "all your heart." Common sense. True love demands attention. You're not cheating on the side. So the ideal of Catholicism is total devotion to God, not having 13 hungry kids who want attention too. There's nothing wrong with having 13 kids, but it's not the Catholic ideal. Jesus is the model, "the way, the truth and the life." Whether or not you believe he died a virgin, that's what Catholics believe. Obviously chastity is challenging and hard to imagine but not impossible. I'm no expert on the subject but you figure seclusion and diet are part of the equation--Google it. Purity, what a concept. LOL.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333810ecad04bd11000020LMSWed, 08 Feb 2012 22:05:52 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333810ecad04bd11000020
I agree, Henry, that the world has changed a great deal in the past 2,000 years in a whole host of ways. One of the beautiful things about the Catholic Church, as this article points out, is that the Church's stance has not changed. In the midst of societal pressure (gay "marriage"), governmental policy changes (HHS mandate, for example), and a growing liberal agenda, the Church has remained firmly rooted in its teachings. And what a relief that is.
You say that "98% of Catholics ignore the policy." It's unfortunate that there are so many people who call themselves Catholic but in the same breath pick and choose the tenants of the Magisterium (the very guide that has kept the Church constant in the midst of an ever-changing world) to which they will adhere. It's not a cafeteria line. Either you're in or you're out.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33342769bedd6620000039DeDeWed, 08 Feb 2012 21:49:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33342769bedd6620000039
How is it a straw man? Brendan wrote even today about a retraction by Cardinal Egan of an apology for the abuse. We are sick of being treated like we have no ability to take control of our own bodies by people who have lost moral authority. They need to get their own house in order before they go after us.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333201ecad04900700002bDeDeWed, 08 Feb 2012 21:40:01 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f333201ecad04900700002b
Yep. this coming from the guy who called us "hysterical" and overreacting to the Komen debacle. Could you have been more sexist if you tried, Brendan? And that's you premise too...Do take us back 100 years when we were property, we couldn't vote, so many of us died in childbirth. No thanks. I'll take care of my own body and determine my own fate thank you very much. And the rank hypocrisy of talking about the venerable church, the same church that chose to cover up the systematic abuse of innocent children. Ask the Irish and Enda Kenny what they think of how they behaved - because of all the pomp etc. Double hypocrisy. This is 2012 and the Church needs to change. It was a terrible idea putting Benedict in charge. Business as usual.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33286f6bb3f7ea23000011Justin PoppitiWed, 08 Feb 2012 20:59:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33286f6bb3f7ea23000011
Yawn...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331f866bb3f79510000037CWed, 08 Feb 2012 20:21:10 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331f866bb3f79510000037
Go to colombia to the slums and let me know how all those mother of 4 with 4 different fathers at the tender age of 20 are doing.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331d25eab8ea4103000017VaferWed, 08 Feb 2012 20:11:01 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331d25eab8ea4103000017
ugh. what a foolish article. "Regardless of how you feel about the Church's stance on birth control, it's proven pretty prophetic." some goober probably said that not wearing tin hats over your crotch created all those problems too. A direct correlation? No.
And btw, China has a 5,000 year history of civilization, which is a little longer than the 2,000 years noted.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331c14ecad04016200002dDMGWed, 08 Feb 2012 20:06:28 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331c14ecad04016200002d
First, we are talking about a CHANGE in the law. For over 235 years this country has gotten along just fine without requiring religious institutions to violate their own LONGSTANDING principles and morals. To tell a church that it MUST violate the very fundamentals of its existence in order to CONTINUE to serve its mission WHILE we have a Constitution that protects freedom of religion is wrong on so many levels it defies credibility. You don't have to agree with it. You don't even have to understand it. You simply have to either tolerate it or amend the Constitution. Perhaps religion is "quaint' in this 21st century of rampant preemptive war, torture, pornography, corruption and deceit. Perhaps the entire Bill of Rights have outlived their usefulness. Perhaps all civil liberties should be sacrificed to the tyranny of this brave new world of the materialistic and the profane. In this "I'm going to get mine", entitlement world perhaps the Ten Commandments are outmoded. Who needs a God when we are the 'Sole Remaining Super Power'. I'm sure we have some room left in Gitmo if God wants to argue about it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331af9ecad04e35b000041smokeWed, 08 Feb 2012 20:01:45 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331af9ecad04e35b000041
I am a lutheran and have been to catholic services and there is not a lot of difference between the lutherans and the catholics , the only differences being on birth control, we lutherans are also opposed ot abortion, and martin luther was a catholic priest who just wanted to reform the catholic church , aside from the birth control issue , lutherans and catholics are very similar. There were numerous lutheran churches in america at the time he was here and so would guess he attended some lutheran church services and ie not so different that the catholics.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331a9eecad040d620000189 was too manyWed, 08 Feb 2012 20:00:14 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331a9eecad040d62000018
The number is totally relevant. Unless you and your wife want to be celibate, the only rhythm is an additional birthday party every year. This uncle of mine could not spend time with his kids as he was working constantly (to no avail). And all this suffering is somehow OK as he was "building treasure in heaven". He felt that he was offending God Himself by not following the church's teaching exactly. They were certainly poor, though. They counted the raisins to divide them up for dessert. When there were raisins. So here these 9 were in an affluent society, and they were dirt poor.... Thanks a lot, Rome.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3317e26bb3f7ea7e000052Not fireWed, 08 Feb 2012 19:48:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3317e26bb3f7ea7e000052
Tocqueville was referring to his experiences witnessing Protestant services......http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331757eab8eaf074000035Is DMG short for DeMaGogue?Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:46:15 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331757eab8eaf074000035
The requirement doesn't mandate that Catholics take birth control or have abortions if pregnant. It simply requires the Catholic Church as an EMPLOYER to provide adequate benefits as mandated by federal law. Do you think that the Catholic church or any other "religious" employer should be exempt from federal workplace regulations in the name of religious freedom? We are not talking about the internal workings of the church, its dogma or practices. We are talking about health insurance for teachers, secretaries, doctors, nurses, principles, and janitors! Do you think every tenured professor at Georgetown or Boston College lives by the cannons of the Holy Roman Church and relies solely on the rhythm method? I'd like you to find a professor of hard sciences from any Catholic University that believes in intelligent design. How about an astronomy course taught by a priest that teaches a heliocentric universe theory.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3312f6eab8ea3c6e00003cRightLiesWed, 08 Feb 2012 19:27:34 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3312f6eab8ea3c6e00003c
The grass is always greener on the other side of reality.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331253ecad04da53000015smokeWed, 08 Feb 2012 19:24:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f331253ecad04da53000015
Not until I went into the churches of America and heard her pulpits flame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power. America is great because America is good and if America ever ceases to be good America will cease to be great. ALEXIS DE TOCQUEVILLE 1805-1859http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f330fd96bb3f70779000008moderndayabolitionistWed, 08 Feb 2012 19:14:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f330fd96bb3f70779000008
The actual number of kids is not really relevant to this issue. Just because someone is able to procreate does not mean he/she is capable of being a parent. Just because someone can have kids does not mean he/she SHOULD do so. The real issue in America is that people decide to pop out a few/several kids, and then spend themselves into oblivion pretending to be good parents by making sure their kids have an X-box, a Playstation, a Wii, and every iteration of the Nintendo DS, I-Pad, I-Phone, and I-Pod. What these kids really need is the love, affection, attention, and time of their parents. Here's the key America: spend some actual time with your kids, rather than working trying to amass a pile of consumeristic crap. Turn off the TV, shut down the computer, come home from work, and focus on your kids. You will be amazed at how well they will turn out!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33084669beddf549000002Birth control helps the economy Wed, 08 Feb 2012 18:41:58 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33084669beddf549000002
If a young, newlywed couple does the traditional catholic thing and ends up having kids rights away, it's more likely to put them a financial bind, and could start a brutal cycle of welfare/charity dependency.
As someone who's family helped people like that, I can tell you about numerous young couples and single parents who didn't use birth control b/c of their religious beliefs, and most of them that had kids were nowhere near ready financially, nor were they mature enough to handle it.
It's not just horny young teens that want/need birth control, it's young and/or newlywed couples that benefit from birth control. What's wrong with a couple using birth control and waiting to have kids until their finances are in order?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3306afeab8eae651000033DMGWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:35:11 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3306afeab8eae651000033
This is NOT a debate about birth control. It is a debate about whether the Catholic Church can be required by law to violate its own principles given that the Constitution STILL protects freedom of religion. The reason this protection is delinated in the Constitution is that the founding fathers knew, based on history, that governments are destined to come into conflict with religions.
Henry seems to be saying that after 2000 years religious principles are outmoded. What he fails to acknowledge is that for people like him they were NEVER valid. All I, and the founding fathers, are asking is that he TOLERATE others with these beliefs. I personally am an agnostic but I am ready to help defend the beliefs of others because I would like their help when the government attempts to compel me to do things against my conscience. ..especially when the rights in question are expressly protected by the law of the land.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f330645eab8ea215400003ckatydidntWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:33:25 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f330645eab8ea215400003c
Add a comment...Why is it that 9 billion people is horrendous and 9 billions dollars is nothing. To give you an idea of how little space people actually fill up lets do a little math problem. Let us give everyperson on this planet 9 square feet to stand in. Since vast numbers of people are under 20 that is pretty generous assessment of how much space they would need to stand if placed right next to each other. You have 9 billion people, times 9 square feet, you would need 81 billion square feet for people to stand together. There are 27,878,400 sq ft in a sq mile. You would only need 2905.5 square miles for everyone to stand in. The state of Maryland is 12, 407 sq miles. So if the 9 billion people stood side by side they wouldn't even take up 1/4 of the state of Maryland.
Now we do not stand side by side, and we have a lot of infrsastructure around us. But at the same time, in many cities we do live on top of each other in condos.
Food shortages abound in places like Africa and India more for political and lack of modern farming techniques than because of any lack of land. The western nations don't experience famine because of the widespread use of refrigeration. When my husband worked as a medical missionary in Africa, the meat was dried and covered with flies and vegatables were very abundant at times and nowhere other times. If you are really concerned about the people of the earth bring electricity, and clean water, and DDT to wipe out malaria.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3305c569bedd1339000021Tom ArmstrongWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:31:17 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3305c569bedd1339000021
The thing is, as other commenters have noted, it NOT about birth control (NFP, etc). It's about abortion at ANY stage. Agree or disagree, there's a consistency to the argument. The Church always will endeavor to err on the side of life. If the CHurch is wrong, nobody has died for it's mistake. If those opposed to the church's teaching are wrong... Ultimately that's the discussion that few on the pro-abortion side are willing to take on. IF it's a BABY, then it's murder, plain and simple. Really nothing to argue about. Convenience has nothing to do with it. Lots of people are inconvenient to other people- we don't just "off" them. If it's not a baby, then nothing to argue about. But the science keeps making it clearer and clearer...
All that said, and acknowledging that we will most likely never agree on these matters, I applaud your intellectual honesty in allowing the other side a rational rebuttal.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f330381ecad046937000039Henry, there is nothing new under the sunWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:21:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f330381ecad046937000039
the world has changed a lot and then again nothing has really changed.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3303106bb3f7d66000001aYou forgot to mention how the pill ends up sexually castrating womenWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:19:44 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f3303106bb3f7d66000001a
Do some research and see how many women lose their sex drive after being on the pill.
Kind of ironic in that the pill claims to give you your sexual freedom.
Ah, the unintended consequences.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33028beab8eac35200000b9 was too manyWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:17:31 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f33028beab8eac35200000b
I can only tell you of my devout uncle who had 9 kids under this natural family planning method. Maybe he was not so good at it. They lost their home eventually, and have been living off the kindness of relatives and the largess of the state. The kids are grown now, and I cannot begin tell you the therapy bills. The question is: would it have been better if they were never born? I don't know, but I can tell you this... the two who are married are stopping at two kids. 6 will not contribute to the gene pool, and 1 is undecided on kids.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ffd26bb3f7aa54000048JamesWed, 08 Feb 2012 18:05:54 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ffd26bb3f7aa54000048
The Church founded by Jesus Christ should not be expected to change with the society around it. Its teachings are based upon the revelation of Christ in the Gospels and in Sacred Tradition. If you want affirmation of your conduct, join a support group. If you want salvation and truth, join the Catholic Church.
The article points out that the Church was right, not that the Church's correct understanding of human nature will be accepted in this culture or even become practical in a world that values pleasure of parentage, divorce over reconciliation, and fails to see the sacredness of the marital act as an expression of Trinitarian communion. We live in a world that is no longer Christian, at least not predominantly and emphatically in its social mores. While we can't perhaps expect people to obey a teaching they don't understand, it perhaps would be wise for those Christians who are serious about faith in Jesus to look at the Church's wisdom and begin a project of reevangelization from the bases of society up through its power structures.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32fdf469bedd772c00001aAxeWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:57:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32fdf469bedd772c00001a
All organized religion has lost it's hold on the masses since they lost their ability to kill those who would hold differing beliefs, especially non-belief, tick, tock.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32fc516bb3f7a556000005DMGWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:50:57 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32fc516bb3f7a556000005
"The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company."
That's just the point. If the Catholic Church becomes "just like any organization or company" it loses its moral authority and its entire reason for existence. If its rules can arbitrarily be changed there is nothing sacred about them. We are talking about religion here not your local condo association. It isn't suppose to be easy to follow the rules of the church (God's rules)...that's why it's a test. The rules don't even have to make sense although this article makes a pretty good case for them. The rules are supposed to be followed as an article of faith.
It's fine to be an agnostic or even an atheist but if you are going to discuss religion at least buy a clue about what these institutions are supposed to represent. Hint: It isn't some passing fad, or some prevailing mood or the dictates of some bureaucracy or government. It has to do with centuries-old principles designed to last forever. 2000 years is insignificant in the infinite expanse of time. If the world has changed then it is the world that is wrong...NOT God. It really comes down to what you believe is the meaning of life. You have free will so the choice is yours to make but there is a right answer or there is none at all.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f9b26bb3f7b550000016Gary AndersonWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:39:46 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f9b26bb3f7b550000016
What is the difference between artificial and natural? If is wrong why is natural right? It makes no sense.
People determine how many children they have, and there is nothing wrong with that. The Catholic Church is bonkers on this and foolish.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f92feab8ead73b000053Pascal-Emmanuel GobryWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:37:35 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f92feab8ead73b000053
Couple things:
- The Church does allow married couples to use natural means of birth control, so if they don't want to have 13 kids, they can do that. (And people can and do afford large families.) A more important question is: are we (and women) better off now that promiscuity is widely tolerated, and indeed encouraged? I think the evidence is far from one-sided.
- On global population growth, the UN's demographers do seem to think global population will stop growing at 9 billion. I HOPE they're wrong! But everyone who's bet that the world population was unsustainable has been wrong. In the 60s folks said we should halt technological progress as we couldn't sustain technology for everyone; they said people in China wouldn't get phones anyway because there would never be enough switchboard operators for those 300 million Chinese. Every time we've hit an apparent limit we've pushed pas it thanks to human ingenuity--and that ingenuity (like Soylent Green) is people. Which means we need more folks. And if the Earth does get too crowded one day, as you noted recently on the commercialization of space, we'll have spaceships anyway.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f5a669bedd5e1d000034Jungle JimWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:22:30 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f5a669bedd5e1d000034
Since most of the countries with high birth rates aren't Catholic or likely to become Catholic, what's your point ?
The whole issue with Obama and the arguments of the writers of this article strike me as an attempt by the Church to reclaim the moral high ground after the sexual and financial problems and their aftermath. They've suffered a decline in attendance and in influence among those who do show up. Most Catholic families openly use birth control no matter what the Bishops say. I think that this is simply a manufactured issue to try to reinvigorate American Catholicism. For the record, I was a Catholic.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f4f869bedd5e1d000029Alan MilesWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:19:36 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f4f869bedd5e1d000029
There is absolutely zero evidence that morals are higher or lower today than they were 40 years ago or a hundred years ago or even 2000 years ago. We have this inane idea that Western civilization revolved around neat little nuclear families for centuries until the 1960's. This is rubbish. Infidelity and out-of-wedlock births have been the norm for centuries, except for a brief period in America in the middle of the 20th Century - and even then mainly on TV rather than in real life.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f449ecad047d1900002dVA ManWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:16:41 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f449ecad047d1900002d
But Henry, can't you charge more for advertising if more people come to your website? A smaller world population can only hurt your business.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f421ecad04811d00003eCamiloWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:16:01 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f421ecad04811d00003e
May I suggest you read this. I found it super interesting. I'm a very devout Catholic <a href="http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/42_NFP.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.mostholyfamilymonastery.com/42_NFP.pdf</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f3836bb3f78848000015badbobWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:13:23 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f3836bb3f78848000015
And what's wrong with that? That's his business. Besides, what else would you be doing right now if you wern't reading BI...playing with yourself?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f2fceab8ea9e2e00005ebadbobWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:11:08 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f2fceab8ea9e2e00005e
I don't quite see the good defense. Most of the argument was about children being born out of wedlock. How does this support the argument against birth control. To me it would be an argument for it instead. On a side note, has it occured to anyone that crime rates have consistantly dropped since 15 years after Roe v Wade? The argument here being that since abortion has been available, 15 years hence,the number of unwanted children reaching 15 years of age (the beginning of their career in crime) has declined proportionately to the drop in crime. And that if abortion laws are repealed that 15 years later crime will again go on the upswing.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f2b7ecad04701f000006plate of pieWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:09:59 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f2b7ecad04701f000006
I'm not a Catholic, but I think that denomination has bigger items on its plate than interfering in a harmless private matter.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f24decad047d1b000034joe poncakiaWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:08:13 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f24decad047d1b000034
Screw all this penny anty banter Henry...Throw HuffPo and Obama overboard and start kissing Drudges ass. I'm sure you noticed all the clicks you got when Drudge linked to the Reich story you ran.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f1cdecad047915000047idiotWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:06:05 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f1cdecad047915000047
yeah, way to completely ignore everything in the entire article and attack a strawman. Liberalism truly a disease.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f11069beddc90e000080artful dodgerWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:02:56 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f11069beddc90e000080
Just to note: since the fall of Rome, nearly all economic advancement in the world has been driven by societies that are NOT primarily Catholic. The Renaissance in Italy, which is credited with waking up Europe from the Dark Ages, is mostly credited as a relearning of pre-Catholic Roman and Greek ideas. The Protestant reformation led to the rise of northern Europe-- industrialization started in Britain, and today Germany and Scandinavian countries lead Europe economically. What do the PIIGS have in common? All Catholic, except Greece. British North America is globally dominant. Catholic Latin America still struggles. Advanced Asian countries are non-Catholic. Most ascendant developing nations are non-Catholic. Have I made my point yet???http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f1066bb3f7573e000022LamLawIndyWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:02:46 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f1066bb3f7573e000022
Of course, most people can't afford 13 kids these days. That's why the Catholic Church has always accepted natural family planning (NFP) as a way to space children and delay conception for grave reasons. Much more than the "rhythm method," NFP is a medically-proven was of naturally (read: without CHEMICALS) way of spacing births. You can find out more at <a href="http://www.creightonmodel.com" target="_blank">http://www.creightonmodel.com</a>. Note that the Creighton Model was devised by medical doctors.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f08069beddae13000022VinWed, 08 Feb 2012 17:00:32 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32f08069beddae13000022
Leave it to the Politics Editor to use anecdotal evidence and skirt the issue of societal change. Many people want to have fewer children since they represent a significant cost and they do not need to generate low cost farm labor in the modern age. Birth control provides the mechanism to enforce that personal choice. The decline of the traditional family unit has not arisen from expanded choice in sexual partners brought on by the prevalence of birth control but, by the decline in the ability of communities to exert social pressure on individuals to enter into or remain in family units.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32efa3ecad047619000011Former CU WriterWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:56:51 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32efa3ecad047619000011
There's something called natural family planning Henry. True, it does require some self-discipline and isn't 100% surefire, but then again, given that more than half of all pregnancies are unplanned, it stands to reason that artificial contraception isn't bulletproof either.
There have always been people banging on the "we have too many people" drum. Were we not headed for a cataclysm due to overpopulation back in the 1970s? A fair number of ridiculous movies were based on that premise if I recall.
The policy of the Church is not for all its members to have 13 kids. In fact, the Church would argue if you do that and don't have the means to support those kids, you're also in grave error. Catholics are called to be "open to life" in their marriages, but not reckless. Read up on the doctrine before you make ridiculous statements as you did in your previous post. I'm glad to see Michael provide a good, solid defense of both the Church's positions and its vision.
I'm not saying folks of other faiths need to fall in line behind the Church. You have your rights to do whatever you please. But ignoring that the Church was dead right on the social impact is to be blind to the facts.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ef8569bedd841300000eWrongWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:56:21 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ef8569bedd841300000e
Population falls as countries get richer (unless they allow lots of immigration). Most advanced western countries are at or below their replacement rate, and most European countries (and the US) are almost at crisis levels, since there aren't enough young people to take care of the elderly population. "People don't want 13 kids" in your world. They do in other parts of the world. And in many respects, their survival depends on it.
That's the logic behind the UN's prediction, your "shock" notwithstanding.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ee79eab8ead130000002Chartist Friend from PittsburghWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:51:53 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ee79eab8ead130000002
God bless both of you - great article.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ee6969bedda013000001Well done, GuysWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:51:37 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ee6969bedda013000001
But it doesn't matter. Henry got what he wanted: clicks.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ede969bedd180700005cOh Come OnWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:49:29 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ede969bedd180700005c
Haven't you guys milked this story for all the clicks it worth?
You know that its the law that Catholic hospitals provide birth control in 28 states, don't you? It's in the Massachusetts Health Care Law too and all the hospitals complied.
This is a non-issue.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ed9c69bedde301000069Henry BlodgetWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:48:12 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ed9c69bedde301000069
Good defense! Much better than all the mortified hate mail I got. But still disagree.
The world has changed a lot in 2,000 years. There are plenty of people (and Catholics) now. I'd be shocked if the global population stopped growing at 9 billion, and many folks think there are already too many people for the Earth to sustainably support. (Time will tell on that, obviously).
But more importantly, the policy is just completely impractical. People don't want 13 kids these days. They can't afford 13 kids these days. And that's why 98% of Catholics ignore the policy.
The Church needs to be flexible and change with the circumstances, just like any organization or company. And the world has changed a lot in 2,000 years.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ed7a6bb3f7693400002dQueenofMazWed, 08 Feb 2012 16:47:38 -0500http://www.businessinsider.com/c/4f32ed7a6bb3f7693400002d
The good ol' days where women had no vote or property rights, non-whites were segregated and poor, and alter boys were quietly passed around for sex after Mass? Yeah, we have really gone down hill in the last 40 years.
Wait, was this a parody?